MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997103344 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1912.13082

The Shmoop Corpus: A Dataset of Stories with Loosely Aligned Summaries

2019· preprint· en· W2997103344 on OpenAlexaff
Atef Chaudhury, Makarand Tapaswi, Seung Wook Kim, Sanja Fidler

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAutomatic summarizationParagraphNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceSet (abstract data type)Reading comprehensionConstruct (python library)ExploitReading (process)ComprehensionSentenceExposition (narrative)LinguisticsWorld Wide WebLiteratureArtProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding stories is a challenging reading comprehension problem for machines as it requires reading a large volume of text and following long-range dependencies. In this paper, we introduce the Shmoop Corpus: a dataset of 231 stories that are paired with detailed multi-paragraph summaries for each individual chapter (7,234 chapters), where the summary is chronologically aligned with respect to the story chapter. From the corpus, we construct a set of common NLP tasks, including Cloze-form question answering and a simplified form of abstractive summarization, as benchmarks for reading comprehension on stories. We then show that the chronological alignment provides a strong supervisory signal that learning-based methods can exploit leading to significant improvements on these tasks. We believe that the unique structure of this corpus provides an important foothold towards making machine story comprehension more approachable.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.117 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207