The DOI matches its DataCite record.
QMSum: A New Benchmark for Query-based Multi-domain Meeting Summarization
Abstract
Meetings are a key component of human collaboration. As increasing numbers of meetings are recorded and transcribed, meeting summaries have become essential to remind those who may or may not have attended the meetings about the key decisions made and the tasks to be completed. However, it is hard to create a single short summary that covers all the content of a long meeting involving multiple people and topics. In order to satisfy the needs of different types of users, we define a new query-based multi-domain meeting summarization task, where models have to select and summarize relevant spans of meetings in response to a query, and we introduce QMSum, a new benchmark for this task. QMSum consists of 1,808 query-summary pairs over 232 meetings in multiple domains. Besides, we investigate a locate-then-summarize method and evaluate a set of strong summarization baselines on the task. Experimental results and manual analysis reveal that QMSum presents significant challenges in long meeting summarization for future research. Dataset is available at \url{https://github.com/Yale-LILY/QMSum}.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
ReadAgent structures reading by grouping content, condensing episodes into memories, and retrieving passages, with effectiveness shown on QUALITY, NarrativeQA, and QMSum.
“Specifically, ReadAgent structures reading by grouping content, condensing episodes into memories, and retrieving passages, with effectiveness shown on datasets like QUALITY (Pang et al., 2021), NarrativeQA (Koˇ cisk` y et al., 2018), and QMSum (Zhong et al., 2021).”
From Survey on Evaluation of LLM-based Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2021
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey
Gao, Y., Xiong, Y., Gao, X., Jia, K., Pan, J., Bi, Y., Dai, Y., Sun, J., Wang, M., & Wang, H. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.10997 · Cited by 876
A Length-Extrapolatable Transformer
Sun, Y., Dong, L., Patra, B., Ma, S., Huang, S., Benhaim, A., Chaudhary, V., Song, X., & Wei, F. (2023) · Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.816 · Cited by 59
Chain of Agents: Large Language Models Collaborating on Long-Context Tasks
Zhang, Y., Sun, R., Chen, Y., Pfister, T., Zhang, R., & Arik, S. Ö. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.02818 · Cited by 47
“QMSum [93] is a query-based summarization dataset, formed by meeting transcripts from multiple domains such as academic and industrial products.”
Survey on Evaluation of LLM-based Agents
Yehudai, A., Eden, L., Li, A., Uziel, G., Zhao, Y., Bar-Haim, R., Cohan, A., & Shmueli-Scheuer, M. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.16416 · Cited by 26
SnapKV: LLM Knows What You are Looking for Before Generation
Li, Y., Huang, Y., Yang, B., Venkitesh, B., Locatelli, A., Ye, H., Cai, T., Lewis, P., & Chen, D. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.14469 · Cited by 74
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhong, M., Yin, D., Yu, T., Zaidi, A., Mutuma, M., Jha, R., Awadallah, A. H., Celikyilmaz, A., Liu, Y., Qiu, X., & Radev, D.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2021
- arXiv
- 2104.05938
- References
- 0
- Type
- Preprint
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
