Cited by 105Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques

Annotating and Modeling Fine-grained Factuality in Summarization

Open access
Goyal, Tanya, Durrett, Greg·2021·Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies

Abstract

Recent pre-trained abstractive summarization systems have started to achieve credible performance, but a major barrier to their use in practice is their propensity to output summaries that are not faithful to the input and that contain factual errors.While a number of annotated datasets and statistical models for assessing factuality have been explored, there is no clear picture of what errors are most important to target or where current techniques are succeeding and failing.We explore both synthetic and human-labeled data sources for training models to identify factual errors in summarization, and study factuality at the word-, dependency-, and sentence-level.Our observations are threefold.First, exhibited factual errors differ significantly across datasets, and commonly-used training sets of simple synthetic errors do not reflect errors made on abstractive datasets like XSUM.Second, human-labeled data with fine-grained annotations provides a more effective training signal than sentence-level annotations or synthetic data.Finally, we show that our best factuality detection model enables training of more factual XSUM summarization models by allowing us to identify non-factual tokens in the training data. 1Reference Summary: An early-medieval gold pendant created from an imitation of a Byzantine coin that was found in a Norfolk field is a "rare find", a museum expert has said. Source Article Fragment:Discovered on land at North Elmham, near Dereham, the circa 600 AD coin was created by French rulers of the time to increase their available currency.[…] The pendant was declared treasure by the Norfolk coroner on Wednesday.An 18th century coin believed to be worth more than #1m has been discovered.A gold pendant created from a necklace was found in a field Entitycentric (Ent-C)The pendant was declared a treasure by the Norfolk coroner on Wednesday.The pendant was declared a treasure by the Ohio coroner on March.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-main.114

Cites

34 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Alexander R Fabbri, Wojciech Kryściński, Bryan McCann, Caiming Xiong, Richard Socher, and Dragomir Radev. 2021. SummEval: Re-evaluating summarization evaluation. Transactions of the Asso- ciation for Computational Linguistics (TACL).
  2. Tanya Goyal and Greg Durrett. 2020a. Evaluating fac- tuality in generation with dependency-level entail- ment. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Findings, pages 3592-3603.
  3. Yuning Mao, Xiang Ren, Heng Ji, and Jiawei Han. 2020. Constrained Abstractive Summarization: Pre- serving Factual Consistency with Constrained Gen- eration. In arXiv preprint 2010.12723. · arXiv
  4. Ani Nenkova and Rebecca Passonneau. 2004. Evaluat- ing content selection in summarization: The pyra- mid method. In Proceedings of the Human Lan- guage Technology Conference of the North Ameri- can Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: HLT-NAACL 2004, pages 145-152, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Association for Com- putational Linguistics.
  5. Yixin Nie, Haonan Chen, and Mohit Bansal. 2019. Combining fact extraction and verification with neu- ral semantic matching networks. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol- ume 33, pages 6859-6866.
  6. Alex Wang, Kyunghyun Cho, and Mike Lewis. 2020. Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of Summaries. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
  7. Thomas Wolf, Lysandre Debut, Victor Sanh, Julien Chaumond, Clement Delangue, Anthony Moi, Pier- ric Cistac, Tim Rault, R'emi Louf, Morgan Funtow- icz, and Jamie Brew. 2019. Huggingface's trans- formers: State-of-the-art natural language process- ing. ArXiv, abs/1910.03771. · arXiv
  8. Kristian Woodsend and Mirella Lapata. 2012. Multi- ple Aspect Summarization Using Integer Linear Pro- gramming. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Process- ing (EMNLP) and Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL).
  9. Zheng Zhao, Shay B Cohen, and Bonnie Webber. 2020. Reducing quantity hallucinations in abstractive sum- marization. In Findings of EMNLP.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goyal, T., & Durrett, G.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies
Published
2021
Pages
1449-1462
OpenAlex
W3152781945
Cited by
100
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 9
FWCI
10.28
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1814522)
  • Nvidia
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Text Analysis Techniques
Keywords
abstractive summarization, factuality, fine-grained annotation, XSum, training data quality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review