Lune

EMNLP Findings2021

Are Factuality Checkers Reliable? Adversarial Meta-evaluation of Factuality in Summarization

Yiran Chen, Pengfei Liu, Xipeng Qiu

Abstract

With the continuous upgrading of the summarization systems driven by deep neural networks, researchers have higher requirements on the quality of the generated summaries, which should be not only fluent and informative but also factually correct. As a result, the field of factual evaluation has developed rapidly recently. Despite its initial progress in evaluating generated summaries, the meta-evaluation methodologies of factuality metrics are limited in their opacity, leading to the insufficient understanding of factuality metrics' relative advantages and their applicability. In this paper, we present an adversarial meta-evaluation methodology that allows us to (i) diagnose the fine-grained strengths and weaknesses of 6 existing top-performing metrics over 24 diagnostic test datasets, (ii) search for directions for further improvement by data augmentation. Our observations from this work motivate us to propose several calls for future research. We make all codes, diagnostic test datasets, trained factuality models available: https://github.com/zide05/ AdvFact.

Ask Lune

Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.

Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.

Questions to start from

Lune answers from

the full paper · 8 top-tier papers that cite it · related work

Get the answer

Free to start. No credit card required.

Cited by top-tier papers8

  1. Towards a Unified Multi-Dimensional Evaluator for Text GenerationMing Zhong, Yang Liu, Da Yin, Yuning Mao et al.EMNLP 2022 · 103 citations
  2. Do Automatic Factuality Metrics Measure Factuality? A Critical EvaluationSanjana Ramprasad, Byron C. WallaceNeurIPS 2025 · 13 citations
  3. On the Blind Spots of Model-Based Evaluation Metrics for Text GenerationTianxing He, Jingyu Zhang, Tianle Wang, Sachin Kumar et al.ACL 2023 · 10 citations
  4. Are LLM-based Evaluators Confusing NLG Quality Criteria?Xinyu Hu, Mingqi Gao, Sen Hu, Yang Zhang et al.ACL 2024 · 6 citations
  5. QRelScore: Better Evaluating Generated Questions with Deeper Understanding of Context-aware RelevanceXiaoqiang Wang, Bang Liu, Siliang Tang, Lingfei WuEMNLP 2022 · 6 citations

Builds on15

  1. BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTTianyi Zhang, Varsha Kishore, Felix Wu, Kilian Q. Weinberger et al.ICLR 2020 · 8,443 citations
  2. PEGASUS: Pre-training with Extracted Gap-sentences for Abstractive SummarizationJingqing Zhang, Yao Zhao, Mohammad Saleh, Peter J. LiuICML 2020 · 2,453 citations
  3. BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text GenerationWeizhe Yuan, Graham Neubig, Pengfei LiuNeurIPS 2021 · 1,143 citations
  4. ELECTRA: Pre-training Text Encoders as Discriminators Rather Than GeneratorsKevin Clark, Minh-Thang Luong, Quoc V. Le, Christopher D. ManningICLR 2020 · 541 citations
  5. S2ORC: The Semantic Scholar Open Research CorpusKyle Lo, Lucy Lu Wang, Mark Neumann, Rodney Kinney et al.ACL 2020 · 424 citations

Related papers

  1. GO FIGURE: A Meta Evaluation of Factuality in SummarizationSaadia Gabriel, Asli Celikyilmaz, Rahul Jha, Yejin Choi et al.ACL Findings 2021 · 75 citations
  2. Understanding Factual Errors in Summarization: Errors, Summarizers, Datasets, Error DetectorsLiyan Tang, Tanya Goyal, Alexander R. Fabbri, Philippe Laban et al.ACL 2023 · 38 citations
  3. Verify with Caution: The Pitfalls of Relying on Imperfect Factuality MetricsAmeya Godbole, Robin JiaACL Findings 2025
  4. Factual Consistency Evaluation for Text Summarization via Counterfactual EstimationYuexiang Xie, Fei Sun, Yang Deng, Yaliang Li et al.EMNLP Findings 2021 · 42 citations
  5. SMART: Sentences as Basic Units for Text EvaluationReinald Kim Amplayo, Peter J. Liu, Yao Zhao, Shashi NarayanICLR 2023 · 5 citations
Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines