How Much Annotation is Needed to Compare Summarization Models?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.18756v1
• Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 23:34:51 GMT
• Title: How Much Annotation is Needed to Compare Summarization Models?
• Authors: Chantal Shaib, Joe Barrow, Alexa F. Siu, Byron C. Wallace, Ani Nenkova
• Abstract summary: We investigate the test sample size necessary to select a preferred model in the context of news summarization. We find that, while automatic metrics are stable at smaller sample sizes, only some automatic metrics are able to moderately predict model win rates according to human preference.
• Score: 31.899027054430153
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Modern instruction-tuned models have become highly capable in text generation tasks such as summarization, and are expected to be released at a steady pace. In practice one may now wish to choose confidently, but with minimal effort, the best performing summarization model when applied to a new domain or purpose. In this work, we empirically investigate the test sample size necessary to select a preferred model in the context of news summarization. Empirical results reveal that comparative evaluation converges quickly for both automatic and human evaluation, with clear preferences for a system emerging from under 100 examples. The human preference data allows us to quantify how well automatic scores can reproduce preference rankings across a variety of downstream summarization tasks. We find that, while automatic metrics are stable at smaller sample sizes, only some automatic metrics are able to moderately predict model win rates according to human preference.

Related papers

• Breaking Silos: Adaptive Model Fusion Unlocks Better Time Series Forecasting [64.45587649141842]
  Time-series forecasting plays a critical role in many real-world applications.<n>No single model consistently outperforms others across different test samples, but instead (ii) each model excels in specific cases.<n>We introduce TimeFuse, a framework for collective time-series forecasting with sample-level adaptive fusion of heterogeneous models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-24T00:45:07Z)
• LiveXiv -- A Multi-Modal Live Benchmark Based on Arxiv Papers Content [62.816876067499415]
  We propose LiveXiv: a scalable evolving live benchmark based on scientific ArXiv papers. LiveXiv accesses domain-specific manuscripts at any given timestamp and proposes to automatically generate visual question-answer pairs. We benchmark multiple open and proprietary Large Multi-modal Models (LMMs) on the first version of our benchmark, showing its challenging nature and exposing the models true abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T17:51:23Z)
• Introducing Flexible Monotone Multiple Choice Item Response Theory Models and Bit Scales [0.0]
  We present a new model for multiple choice data, the monotone multiple choice (MMC) model, which we fit using autoencoders. We demonstrate empirically that the MMC model outperforms the traditional nominal response IRT model in terms of fit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T12:33:16Z)
• Self-Evolution Learning for Mixup: Enhance Data Augmentation on Few-Shot Text Classification Tasks [75.42002070547267]
  We propose a self evolution learning (SE) based mixup approach for data augmentation in text classification. We introduce a novel instance specific label smoothing approach, which linearly interpolates the model's output and one hot labels of the original samples to generate new soft for label mixing up.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T23:43:23Z)
• Generating Query Focused Summaries without Fine-tuning the Transformer-based Pre-trained Models [0.6124773188525718]
  Fine-tuning the Natural Language Processing (NLP) models for each new data set requires higher computational time associated with increased carbon footprint and cost. In this paper, we try to omit the fine-tuning steps and investigate whether the Marginal Maximum Relevance (MMR)-based approach can help the pre-trained models to obtain query-focused summaries directly from a new data set that was not used to pre-train the models. As indicated by the experimental results, our MMR-based approach successfully ranked and selected the most relevant sentences as summaries and showed better performance than the individual pre-trained models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-10T22:40:15Z)
• Model ensemble instead of prompt fusion: a sample-specific knowledge transfer method for few-shot prompt tuning [85.55727213502402]
  We focus on improving the few-shot performance of prompt tuning by transferring knowledge from soft prompts of source tasks. We propose Sample-specific Ensemble of Source Models (SESoM) SESoM learns to adjust the contribution of each source model for each target sample separately when ensembling source model outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-23T01:33:16Z)
• Efficient Learning of Accurate Surrogates for Simulations of Complex Systems [0.0]
  We introduce an online learning method empowered by sampling-driven sampling. It ensures that all turning points on the model response surface are included in the training data. We apply our method to simulations of nuclear matter to demonstrate that highly accurate surrogates can be reliably auto-generated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-11T20:51:11Z)
• BRIO: Bringing Order to Abstractive Summarization [107.97378285293507]
  We propose a novel training paradigm which assumes a non-deterministic distribution. Our method achieves a new state-of-the-art result on the CNN/DailyMail (47.78 ROUGE-1) and XSum (49.07 ROUGE-1) datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-31T05:19:38Z)
• Few-shot learning through contextual data augmentation [74.20290390065475]
  Machine translation models need to adapt to new data to maintain their performance over time. We show that adaptation on the scale of one to five examples is possible. Our model reports better accuracy scores than a reference system trained with on average 313 parallel examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-31T09:05:43Z)
• One for More: Selecting Generalizable Samples for Generalizable ReID Model [92.40951770273972]
  This paper proposes a one-for-more training objective that takes the generalization ability of selected samples as a loss function. Our proposed one-for-more based sampler can be seamlessly integrated into the ReID training framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-10T06:37:09Z)
• Evaluating Text Coherence at Sentence and Paragraph Levels [17.99797111176988]
  We investigate the adaptation of existing sentence ordering methods to a paragraph ordering task. We also compare the learnability and robustness of existing models by artificially creating mini datasets and noisy datasets. We conclude that the recurrent graph neural network-based model is an optimal choice for coherence modeling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-05T03:31:49Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.