MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412554184 · doi:10.22214/ijraset.2025.73052

Enhancing Technical Documentation through Intelligent Text Summarization Techniques

2025· article· en· W4412554184 on OpenAlexaff
Rajpal Kaur

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomatic summarizationDocumentationComputer scienceTechnical documentationInformation retrievalNatural language processingWorld Wide WebProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an era of fast digital transformation, technical documentation is more important than ever in aiding user knowledge, upkeep of systems, and operational efficiency across a variety of organizations. However, the ever-growing complexity of software platforms, enterprise applications, and IT infrastructures has resulted in a massive amount of technical content that is challenging to navigate and time-consuming to comprehend. Users, including developers, executives, end users, and support engineers, deserve accurate and easily accessible documentation. This study investigates the use of text summarizing techniques in technical documentation workflows to address the issues and improve the overall quality, usability, and efficacy of such content. Text Summarization (TS) entails condensing extensive text into brief forms while preserving its basic meaning. In technical documentation, this feature promotes faster information extraction, comprehension, and user engagement. The study defines two main summary techniques—extractive and abstractive—and assesses their efficacy in a documentation setting. Extractive summarization extracts essential lines or phrases straight from the source material while keeping the underlying structure and vocabulary, which is especially useful in circumstances that need technical precision. In contrast, abstractive summarization paraphrases and rewrites the text in a more reduced manner, resulting in greater fluidity and readability. This study proposes a hybrid model that combines these approaches to achieve a balance of clarity and accuracy. The process involves integrating traditional and transformer-based models like BERT, T5, and PEGASUS to technical documentation datasets. Using supervised fine-tuning and domain-specific corpora, the models are trained to provide summaries that are suited to different user needs. Finally, using text summarizing algorithms in technical documentation is a significant step toward more efficient, userfriendly, and intelligent content delivery. This study establishes the groundwork for creating adaptable documentation systems that match the changing needs of current users.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering TechnologySame topicAdvanced Text Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207