Multi-Fact Correction in Abstractive Text Summarization
Yue Dong, Shuohang Wang, Zhe Gan, Yu Cheng, Jackie Chi Kit Cheung, Jingjing Liu
Abstract
Pre-trained neural abstractive summarization systems have dominated extractive strategies on news summarization performance, at least in terms of ROUGE. However, systemgenerated abstractive summaries often face the pitfall of factual inconsistency: generating incorrect facts with respect to the source text. To address this challenge, we propose Span-Fact, a suite of two factual correction models that leverages knowledge learned from question answering models to make corrections in system-generated summaries via span selection. Our models employ single or multimasking strategies to either iteratively or autoregressively replace entities in order to ensure semantic consistency w.r.t. the source text, while retaining the syntactic structure of summaries generated by abstractive summarization models. Experiments show that our models significantly boost the factual consistency of system-generated summaries without sacrificing summary quality in terms of both automatic metrics and human evaluation.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 5ffd1521-7741-482f-a544-e3ef1bc0707eCited by top-tier papers14
- Factuality Enhanced Language Models for Open-Ended Text GenerationNayeon Lee, Wei Ping, Peng Xu, Mostofa Patwary et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 318 citations
- A Token-level Reference-free Hallucination Detection Benchmark for Free-form Text GenerationTianyu Liu, Yizhe Zhang, Chris Brockett, Yi Mao et al.ACL 2022 · 194 citations
- CLIFF: Contrastive Learning for Improving Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive SummarizationShuyang Cao, Lu WangEMNLP 2021 · 130 citations
- Faithful or Extractive? On Mitigating the Faithfulness-Abstractiveness Trade-off in Abstractive SummarizationFaisal Ladhak, Esin Durmus, He He, Claire Cardie et al.ACL 2022 · 74 citations
- Correcting Diverse Factual Errors in Abstractive Summarization via Post-Editing and Language Model InfillingVidhisha Balachandran, Hannaneh Hajishirzi, William W. Cohen, Yulia TsvetkovEMNLP 2022 · 27 citations
Builds on9
- BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTTianyi Zhang, Varsha Kishore, Felix Wu, Kilian Q. Weinberger et al.ICLR 2020 · 8,443 citations
- PEGASUS: Pre-training with Extracted Gap-sentences for Abstractive SummarizationJingqing Zhang, Yao Zhao, Mohammad Saleh, Peter J. LiuICML 2020 · 2,453 citations
- BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and ComprehensionMike Lewis, Yinhan Liu, Naman Goyal, Marjan Ghazvininejad et al.ACL 2020 · 1,224 citations
- Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of SummariesAlex Wang, Kyunghyun Cho, Mike LewisACL 2020 · 317 citations
- FEQA: A Question Answering Evaluation Framework for Faithfulness Assessment in Abstractive SummarizationEsin Durmus, He He, Mona T. DiabACL 2020 · 90 citations
Related papers
- Improving Factual Consistency of Abstractive Summarization via Question AnsweringFeng Nan, Cícero Nogueira dos Santos, Henghui Zhu, Patrick Ng et al.ACL 2021
- X-FACTOR: A Cross-metric Evaluation of Factual Correctness in Abstractive SummarizationSubhajit Chaudhury, Sarathkrishna Swaminathan, R. Chulaka Gunasekara, Maxwell Crouse et al.EMNLP 2022 · 13 citations
- FactKB: Generalizable Factuality Evaluation using Language Models Enhanced with Factual KnowledgeShangbin Feng, Vidhisha Balachandran, Yuyang Bai, Yulia TsvetkovEMNLP 2023 · 10 citations
- Towards Improving Faithfulness in Abstractive SummarizationXiuying Chen, Mingzhe Li, Xin Gao, Xiangliang ZhangNeurIPS 2022 · 39 citations
- Hallucinated but Factual! Inspecting the Factuality of Hallucinations in Abstractive SummarizationMeng Cao, Yue Dong, Jackie Chi Kit CheungACL 2022
