ACL Findings2023
Interpretable Automatic Fine-grained Inconsistency Detection in Text Summarization
Hou Pong Chan, Qi Zeng, Heng Ji
Abstract
Existing factual consistency evaluation approaches for text summarization provide binary predictions and limited insights into the weakness of summarization systems. Therefore, we propose the task of fine-grained inconsistency detection, the goal of which is to predict the fine-grained types of factual errors in a summary. Motivated by how humans inspect factual inconsistency in summaries, we propose an interpretable fine-grained inconsistency detection model, FINEGRAINFACT, which explicitly represents the facts in the documents and summaries with semantic frames extracted by semantic role labeling, and highlights the related semantic frames to predict inconsistency. The highlighted semantic frames help verify predicted error types and correct inconsistent summaries. Experiment results demonstrate that our model outperforms strong baselines and provides evidence to support or refute the summary. 1
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.
Lune answers from
the full paper · 4 top-tier papers that cite it · related work
Free to start. No credit card required.
Cited by top-tier papers4
- Zero-shot Faithful Factual Error CorrectionKung-Hsiang Huang, Hou Pong Chan, Heng JiACL 2023 · 17 citations
- Explaining Sources of Uncertainty in Automated Fact-CheckingJingyi Sun, Greta Warren, Irina Shklovski, Isabelle AugensteinACL 2026 · 3 citations
- Can LMs Generalize to Future Data? An Empirical Analysis on Text SummarizationChi Seng Cheang, Hou Pong Chan, Derek F. Wong, Xuebo Liu et al.EMNLP 2023 · 2 citations
- Narrative License and Model Sycophancy in LLM Summaries of Scientific WorkCalvin Isch, Grace JenningsACL 2026
Builds on11
- 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
- DialogLM: Pre-trained Model for Long Dialogue Understanding and SummarizationMing Zhong, Yang Liu, Yichong Xu, Chenguang Zhu et al.AAAI 2022 · 150 citations
- CLIFF: Contrastive Learning for Improving Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive SummarizationShuyang Cao, Lu WangEMNLP 2021 · 130 citations
- Evaluating Factuality in Generation with Dependency-level EntailmentTanya Goyal, Greg DurrettEMNLP Findings 2020 · 93 citations
- FEQA: A Question Answering Evaluation Framework for Faithfulness Assessment in Abstractive SummarizationEsin Durmus, He He, Mona T. DiabACL 2020 · 90 citations
Related papers
- FIZZ: Factual Inconsistency Detection by Zoom-in Summary and Zoom-out DocumentJoonho Yang, Seunghyun Yoon, Byeongjeong Kim, Hwanhee LeeEMNLP 2024 · 3 citations
- Summary Factual Inconsistency Detection Based on LLMs Enhanced by Universal Information ExtractionAnguo Li, Lei YuACL Findings 2025 · 1 citation
- Fine-grained Factual Consistency Assessment for Abstractive Summarization ModelsSen Zhang, Jianwei Niu, Chuyuan WeiEMNLP 2021 · 8 citations
- CoP: Factual Inconsistency Detection by Controlling the PreferenceShuaijie She, Xiang Geng, Shujian Huang, Jiajun ChenAAAI 2023 · 6 citations
- Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text SummarizationWojciech Kryscinski, Bryan McCann, Caiming Xiong, Richard SocherEMNLP 2020 · 67 citations
