LOOMSUM:Weaving Quantitative and Narrative Evidence for Faithful Long Text-Table Summarization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.00241v1
• Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 18:44:18 GMT
• Title: LOOMSUM:Weaving Quantitative and Narrative Evidence for Faithful Long Text-Table Summarization
• Abstract summary: Long documents often distribute important information across extensive narrative passages and multiple tables.<n>Existing methods may generate individually supported quantitative facts and analytical statements yet associate them incorrectly.<n>We propose LOOMSUM, a training-free framework that extracts source-grounded atomic evidence.
• Score: 4.82648461764215
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Long documents often distribute important information across extensive narrative passages and multiple tables, making faithful summarization particularly challenging. Existing methods may generate individually supported quantitative facts and analytical statements yet associate them incorrectly, producing quantitatively plausible yet analytically unfaithful summaries. In this work, we propose LOOMSUM, a training-free framework that extracts source-grounded atomic evidence, explicitly links table-derived facts with supporting narrative analyses, and plans the discourse structure before generation. We also introduce Table-Grounded Faithfulness (TGF), a claim-level metric that separately evaluates Numeric Grounding, Analysis Support, and Relation Consistency. Experiments on the text--table summarization benchmarks FINDSum and USTT show that LOOMSUM improves analytical faithfulness while maintaining strong summarization quality. Human evaluation finds positive component-level associations with the corresponding human judgments. Our Relation Consistency metric further shows stronger agreement with human relation judgments than generic factuality metrics, indicating that explicit cross-modal linking helps reduce errors in which supported quantities are paired with incorrect narrative interpretations. Together, these findings show that faithful long text--table summarization requires not only grounding individual facts, but also preserving the relations between them.

Related papers

• Stress Testing Factual Consistency Metrics for Long-Document Summarization [36.761145124360944]
  We systematically evaluate the reliability of six widely used reference-free factuality metrics, originally proposed for short-form summarization.<n>We probe metric robustness through seven factuality-preserving perturbations applied to summaries.<n>Our results reveal that existing short-form metrics produce inconsistent scores for semantically equivalent summaries and exhibit declining reliability for information-dense claims.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T23:24:25Z)
• Unstructured Evidence Attribution for Long Context Query Focused Summarization [53.08341620504465]
  We propose to extract unstructured (i.e., spans of any length) evidence in order to acquire more relevant and consistent evidence than in the fixed granularity case.<n>We show how existing systems struggle to copy and properly cite unstructured evidence, which also tends to be "lost-in-the-middle"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T09:57:42Z)
• Faithful, Unfaithful or Ambiguous? Multi-Agent Debate with Initial Stance for Summary Evaluation [29.44609627447293]
  We propose an approach to summary faithfulness evaluation in which multiple agents are assigned initial stances.<n>We introduce a new dimension, ambiguity, and a detailed taxonomy to identify such special cases.<n>Experiments demonstrate our approach can help identify ambiguities, and have even a stronger performance on non-ambiguous summaries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-12T15:46:50Z)
• FENICE: Factuality Evaluation of summarization based on Natural language Inference and Claim Extraction [85.26780391682894]
  We propose Factuality Evaluation of summarization based on Natural language Inference and Claim Extraction (FENICE) FENICE leverages an NLI-based alignment between information in the source document and a set of atomic facts, referred to as claims, extracted from the summary. Our metric sets a new state of the art on AGGREFACT, the de-facto benchmark for factuality evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-04T17:57:18Z)
• Inducing Causal Structure for Abstractive Text Summarization [76.1000380429553]
  We introduce a Structural Causal Model (SCM) to induce the underlying causal structure of the summarization data. We propose a Causality Inspired Sequence-to-Sequence model (CI-Seq2Seq) to learn the causal representations that can mimic the causal factors. Experimental results on two widely used text summarization datasets demonstrate the advantages of our approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-24T16:06:36Z)
• Interpretable Automatic Fine-grained Inconsistency Detection in Text Summarization [56.94741578760294]
  We propose the task of fine-grained inconsistency detection, the goal of which is to predict the fine-grained types of factual errors in a summary. Motivated by how humans inspect factual inconsistency in summaries, we propose an interpretable fine-grained inconsistency detection model, FineGrainFact.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T22:11:47Z)
• Improving Faithfulness of Abstractive Summarization by Controlling Confounding Effect of Irrelevant Sentences [38.919090721583075]
  We show that factual inconsistency can be caused by irrelevant parts of the input text, which act as confounders. We design a simple multi-task model to control such confounding by leveraging human-annotated relevant sentences when available. Our approach improves faithfulness scores by 20% over strong baselines on AnswerSumm citepfabbri 2021answersumm dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-19T18:51:06Z)
• 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)
• SAIS: Supervising and Augmenting Intermediate Steps for Document-Level Relation Extraction [51.27558374091491]
  We propose to explicitly teach the model to capture relevant contexts and entity types by supervising and augmenting intermediate steps (SAIS) for relation extraction. Based on a broad spectrum of carefully designed tasks, our proposed SAIS method not only extracts relations of better quality due to more effective supervision, but also retrieves the corresponding supporting evidence more accurately.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-24T17:37:35Z)
• Factual Consistency Evaluation for Text Summarization via Counterfactual Estimation [42.63902468258758]
  We propose a novel metric to evaluate the factual consistency in text summarization via counterfactual estimation. We conduct a series of experiments on three public abstractive text summarization datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-30T11:48:41Z)

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.