Abstractive Unsupervised Multi-Document Summarization using Paraphrastic Sentence Fusion
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, we aim at developing an unsupervised abstractive summarization system in the multi-document setting. We design a paraphrastic sentence fusion model which jointly performs sentence fusion and paraphrasing using skip-gram word embedding model at the sentence level. Our model improves the information coverage and at the same time abstractiveness of the generated sentences. We conduct our experiments on the human-generated multi-sentence compression datasets and evaluate our system on several newly proposed Machine Translation (MT) evaluation metrics. Furthermore, we apply our sentence level model to implement an abstractive multi-document summarization system where documents usually contain a related set of sentences. We also propose an optimal solution for the classical summary length limit problem which was not addressed in the past research. For the document level summary, we conduct experiments on the datasets of two different domains (e.g., news article and user reviews) which are well suited for multi-document abstractive summarization. Our experiments demonstrate that the methods bring significant improvements over the state-of-the-art methods.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it