Systematic Exploration of Dialogue Summarization Approaches for Reproducibility, Comparative Assessment, and Methodological Innovations for Advancing Natural Language Processing in Abstractive Summarization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.15962v1
• Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 12:47:57 GMT
• Title: Systematic Exploration of Dialogue Summarization Approaches for Reproducibility, Comparative Assessment, and Methodological Innovations for Advancing Natural Language Processing in Abstractive Summarization
• Authors: Yugandhar Reddy Gogireddy, Jithendra Reddy Gogireddy,
• Abstract summary: This paper delves into the reproduction and evaluation of dialogue summarization models. Our research involved a thorough examination of several dialogue summarization models using the AMI dataset. The primary objective was to evaluate the informativeness and quality of the summaries generated by these models through human assessment.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: Reproducibility in scientific research, particularly within the realm of natural language processing (NLP), is essential for validating and verifying the robustness of experimental findings. This paper delves into the reproduction and evaluation of dialogue summarization models, focusing specifically on the discrepancies observed between original studies and our reproduction efforts. Dialogue summarization is a critical aspect of NLP, aiming to condense conversational content into concise and informative summaries, thus aiding in efficient information retrieval and decision-making processes. Our research involved a thorough examination of several dialogue summarization models using the AMI (Augmented Multi-party Interaction) dataset. The models assessed include Hierarchical Memory Networks (HMNet) and various versions of Pointer-Generator Networks (PGN), namely PGN(DKE), PGN(DRD), PGN(DTS), and PGN(DALL). The primary objective was to evaluate the informativeness and quality of the summaries generated by these models through human assessment, a method that introduces subjectivity and variability in the evaluation process. The analysis began with Dataset 1, where the sample standard deviation of 0.656 indicated a moderate dispersion of data points around the mean.

Related papers

• Disco-Bench: A Discourse-Aware Evaluation Benchmark for Language Modelling [70.23876429382969]
  We propose a benchmark that can evaluate intra-sentence discourse properties across a diverse set of NLP tasks. Disco-Bench consists of 9 document-level testsets in the literature domain, which contain rich discourse phenomena. For linguistic analysis, we also design a diagnostic test suite that can examine whether the target models learn discourse knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-16T15:18:25Z)
• A Survey on Out-of-Distribution Evaluation of Neural NLP Models [8.346304805498988]
  Adversarial robustness, domain generalization and dataset biases are three active lines of research contributing to out-of-distribution evaluation on neural NLP models. In this survey, we 1) compare the three lines of research under a unifying definition; 2) summarize the data-generating processes and evaluation protocols for each line of research; and 3) emphasize the challenges and opportunities for future work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-27T07:44:25Z)
• Large Language Models are Diverse Role-Players for Summarization Evaluation [82.31575622685902]
  A document summary's quality can be assessed by human annotators on various criteria, both objective ones like grammar and correctness, and subjective ones like informativeness, succinctness, and appeal. Most of the automatic evaluation methods like BLUE/ROUGE may be not able to adequately capture the above dimensions. We propose a new evaluation framework based on LLMs, which provides a comprehensive evaluation framework by comparing generated text and reference text from both objective and subjective aspects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-27T10:40:59Z)
• Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
  We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs) We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date. We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)
• Analyzing and Evaluating Faithfulness in Dialogue Summarization [67.07947198421421]
  We first perform the fine-grained human analysis on the faithfulness of dialogue summaries and observe that over 35% of generated summaries are faithfully inconsistent respective the source dialogues. We present a new model-level faithfulness evaluation method. It examines generation models with multi-choice questions created by rule-based transformations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-21T07:22:43Z)
• A Unified Understanding of Deep NLP Models for Text Classification [88.35418976241057]
  We have developed a visual analysis tool, DeepNLPVis, to enable a unified understanding of NLP models for text classification. The key idea is a mutual information-based measure, which provides quantitative explanations on how each layer of a model maintains the information of input words in a sample. A multi-level visualization, which consists of a corpus-level, a sample-level, and a word-level visualization, supports the analysis from the overall training set to individual samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-19T08:55:07Z)
• ConvoSumm: Conversation Summarization Benchmark and Improved Abstractive Summarization with Argument Mining [61.82562838486632]
  We crowdsource four new datasets on diverse online conversation forms of news comments, discussion forums, community question answering forums, and email threads. We benchmark state-of-the-art models on our datasets and analyze characteristics associated with the data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-01T22:17:13Z)
• Generating (Factual?) Narrative Summaries of RCTs: Experiments with Neural Multi-Document Summarization [22.611879349101596]
  We evaluate modern neural models for abstractive summarization of relevant article abstracts from systematic reviews. We find that modern summarization systems yield consistently fluent and relevant synopses, but that they are not always factual.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-25T22:22:50Z)
• Learning by Semantic Similarity Makes Abstractive Summarization Better [13.324006587838522]
  We compare the generated summaries from recent LM, BART, and the reference summaries from a benchmark dataset, CNN/DM. Interestingly, model-generated summaries receive higher scores relative to reference summaries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-18T17:59:02Z)

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.