Benchmarking Large Language Models for News Summarization
AI-generated Key Points
- Large language models (LLMs) have potential in automatic summarization
- Human evaluation conducted on 10 LLMs across different pretraining methods, prompts, and model scales
- Instruction tuning is key to LLM's zero-shot summarization capability rather than model size
- Existing studies limited by low-quality references leading to underestimates of human performance and lower few-shot and fine-tuning performance
- High-quality summaries collected from freelance writers for human evaluation
- Quality of freelance writer summaries evaluated using Mechanical Turkers found to be much higher than original reference summaries in CNN/DM and XSUM
- Little difference between quality of freelance writer summaries and those generated by Instruct Davinci model
- LLM-generated summaries and freelance writer-generated summaries had distinctive styles with regard to paraphrasing and copying from source articles
- Annotators recruited to compare Instruct Davinci-generated summaries with those written by freelance writers; overall, Instruct Davinci rated as comparable to freelance writers but individual annotators showed varying preferences
- Instruction tuning crucial for LLMs' summarization capability rather than model scale
- Issues with low-quality references used in previous studies highlighted
- Proposed collecting better quality summaries from freelance writers as a solution
- Findings contribute towards improving LLM evaluation techniques for future research in automatic summarization.
Authors: Tianyi Zhang, Faisal Ladhak, Esin Durmus, Percy Liang, Kathleen McKeown, Tatsunori B. Hashimoto
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise for automatic summarization but the reasons behind their successes are poorly understood. By conducting a human evaluation on ten LLMs across different pretraining methods, prompts, and model scales, we make two important observations. First, we find instruction tuning, and not model size, is the key to the LLM's zero-shot summarization capability. Second, existing studies have been limited by low-quality references, leading to underestimates of human performance and lower few-shot and finetuning performance. To better evaluate LLMs, we perform human evaluation over high-quality summaries we collect from freelance writers. Despite major stylistic differences such as the amount of paraphrasing, we find that LMM summaries are judged to be on par with human written summaries.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
Welcome to our AI assistant! Here are some important things to keep in mind:
- The assistant will only answer questions related to this specific paper.
- Please note that this is not a bot for casual chatting.
- If you want the answer in a language other than the language you chose for navigating the website, simply add "TRANSLATE IN LANGUAGE L" at the end of your query (replace "LANGUAGE L" with the language of your choice).
- For example, you could ask "Can you extract the most important aspect of the paper? TRANSLATE IN SPANISH".
- If you want to keep the history of your questions/answers you should create an account.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through atree representation
Look for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.