Argument Summarization and its Evaluation in the Era of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.00847v4
• Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2025 20:41:10 GMT
• Title: Argument Summarization and its Evaluation in the Era of Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized various Natural Language Generation (NLG) tasks.<n>This paper investigates the integration of state-of-the-art LLMs into ArgSum systems and their evaluation.
• Score: 21.212217094789647
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized various Natural Language Generation (NLG) tasks, including Argument Summarization (ArgSum), a key subfield of Argument Mining. This paper investigates the integration of state-of-the-art LLMs into ArgSum systems and their evaluation. In particular, we propose a novel prompt-based evaluation scheme, and validate it through a novel human benchmark dataset. Our work makes three main contributions: (i) the integration of LLMs into existing ArgSum systems, (ii) the development of two new LLM-based ArgSum systems, benchmarked against prior methods, and (iii) the introduction of an advanced LLM-based evaluation scheme. We demonstrate that the use of LLMs substantially improves both the generation and evaluation of argument summaries, achieving state-of-the-art results and advancing the field of ArgSum. We also show that among the four LLMs integrated in (i) and (ii), Qwen-3-32B, despite having the fewest parameters, performs best, even surpassing GPT-4o.

Related papers

• From Prompting to Preference Optimization: A Comparative Study of LLM-based Automated Essay Scoring [2.3843476850953995]
  Large language models (LLMs) have recently reshaped Automated Essay Scoring (AES)<n>We present a comprehensive comparison of major LLM-based AES paradigms on Writing Task2.<n>Our results reveal clear accuracy-cost-robustness trade-offs across methods, the best configuration, integrating k-SFT and RAG, achieves the strongest overall results with F1-Score 93%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-06T15:59:32Z)
• Let's Use ChatGPT To Write Our Paper! Benchmarking LLMs To Write the Introduction of a Research Paper [64.50822834679101]
  SciIG is a task that evaluates LLMs' ability to produce coherent introductions from titles, abstracts, and related works.<n>We assess five state-of-the-art models, including open-source (DeepSeek-v3, Gemma-3-12B, LLaMA 4-Maverick, MistralAI Small 3.1) and closed-source GPT-4o systems.<n>Results demonstrate LLaMA-4 Maverick's superior performance on most metrics, particularly in semantic similarity and faithfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-19T21:11:11Z)
• Semantic-Augmented Latent Topic Modeling with LLM-in-the-Loop [9.763247646329392]
  Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) is a prominent generative probabilistic model used for uncovering abstract topics within document collections.<n>In this paper, we explore the effectiveness of augmenting topic models with Large Language Models (LLMs) through integration into two key phases: Initialization and Post-Correction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-11T11:20:39Z)
• RALLRec+: Retrieval Augmented Large Language Model Recommendation with Reasoning [22.495874056980824]
  We propose Representation learning and textbfReasoning empowered retrieval-textbfAugmented textbfLarge textbfLanguage model textbfRecommendation (RALLRec+).
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-26T11:03:34Z)
• LLM2: Let Large Language Models Harness System 2 Reasoning [65.89293674479907]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive capabilities across a myriad of tasks, yet they occasionally yield undesirable outputs.<n>We introduce LLM2, a novel framework that combines an LLM with a process-based verifier.<n>LLMs2 is responsible for generating plausible candidates, while the verifier provides timely process-based feedback to distinguish desirable and undesirable outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-29T06:32:36Z)
• Source Code Summarization in the Era of Large Language Models [23.715005053430957]
  Large language models (LLMs) have led to a great boost in the performance of code-related tasks. In this paper, we undertake a systematic and comprehensive study on code summarization in the era of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-09T05:48:42Z)
• DnA-Eval: Enhancing Large Language Model Evaluation through Decomposition and Aggregation [75.81096662788254]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are scalable and economical evaluators. The question of how reliable these evaluators are has emerged as a crucial research question. We propose Decompose and Aggregate, which breaks down the evaluation process into different stages based on pedagogical practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T08:12:30Z)
• A Systematic Evaluation of Large Language Models for Natural Language Generation Tasks [30.54635848057259]
  This paper conducts a comprehensive evaluation of well-known and high-performing large language models (LLMs) We select English and Chinese datasets encompassing Dialogue Generation and Text Summarization. Our study reports both automatic results, accompanied by a detailed analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-16T16:56:54Z)
• Large Language Models: A Survey [66.39828929831017]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have drawn a lot of attention due to their strong performance on a wide range of natural language tasks. LLMs' ability of general-purpose language understanding and generation is acquired by training billions of model's parameters on massive amounts of text data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-09T05:37:09Z)
• LLM-based NLG Evaluation: Current Status and Challenges [41.69249290537395]
  evaluating natural language generation (NLG) is a vital but challenging problem in artificial intelligence. Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential in NLG evaluation in recent years. Various automatic evaluation methods based on LLMs have been proposed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-02T13:06:35Z)
• Leveraging Large Language Models for NLG Evaluation: Advances and Challenges [57.88520765782177]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have opened new avenues for assessing generated content quality, e.g., coherence, creativity, and context relevance. We propose a coherent taxonomy for organizing existing LLM-based evaluation metrics, offering a structured framework to understand and compare these methods. By discussing unresolved challenges, including bias, robustness, domain-specificity, and unified evaluation, this paper seeks to offer insights to researchers and advocate for fairer and more advanced NLG evaluation techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-13T15:59:09Z)
• CLOMO: Counterfactual Logical Modification with Large Language Models [109.60793869938534]
  We introduce a novel task, Counterfactual Logical Modification (CLOMO), and a high-quality human-annotated benchmark. In this task, LLMs must adeptly alter a given argumentative text to uphold a predetermined logical relationship. We propose an innovative evaluation metric, the Self-Evaluation Score (SES), to directly evaluate the natural language output of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T08:29:54Z)
• Benchmarking Generation and Evaluation Capabilities of Large Language Models for Instruction Controllable Summarization [132.25202059478065]
  We benchmark large language models (LLMs) on instruction controllable text summarization. Our study reveals that instruction controllable text summarization remains a challenging task for LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T18:25:26Z)
• Exploring the Potential of Large Language Models in Computational Argumentation [54.85665903448207]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in understanding context and generating natural language. This work aims to embark on an assessment of LLMs, such as ChatGPT, Flan models, and LLaMA2 models, in both zero-shot and few-shot settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T15:12:15Z)
• Which is better? Exploring Prompting Strategy For LLM-based Metrics [6.681126871165601]
  This paper describes the DSBA submissions to the Prompting Large Language Models as Explainable Metrics shared task. Traditional similarity-based metrics such as BLEU and ROUGE have shown to misalign with human evaluation and are ill-suited for open-ended generation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-07T06:36:39Z)
• Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following [54.49567482594617]
  We introduce a challenging meta-evaluation benchmark, LLMBar, designed to test the ability of an LLM evaluator in discerning instruction-following outputs. We discover that different evaluators exhibit distinct performance on LLMBar and even the highest-scoring ones have substantial room for improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T16:38:11Z)
• LLMRec: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Recommendation Task [54.48899723591296]
  The application of Large Language Models (LLMs) in the recommendation domain has not been thoroughly investigated. We benchmark several popular off-the-shelf LLMs on five recommendation tasks, including rating prediction, sequential recommendation, direct recommendation, explanation generation, and review summarization. The benchmark results indicate that LLMs displayed only moderate proficiency in accuracy-based tasks such as sequential and direct recommendation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-23T16:32:54Z)
• A Survey on Large Language Models for Recommendation [77.91673633328148]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful tools in the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP) This survey presents a taxonomy that categorizes these models into two major paradigms, respectively Discriminative LLM for Recommendation (DLLM4Rec) and Generative LLM for Recommendation (GLLM4Rec)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T13:51:26Z)
• On Learning to Summarize with Large Language Models as References [101.79795027550959]
  Large language models (LLMs) are favored by human annotators over the original reference summaries in commonly used summarization datasets. We study an LLM-as-reference learning setting for smaller text summarization models to investigate whether their performance can be substantially improved.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T16:56:04Z)

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.