Do Multi-Document Summarization Models Synthesize?
share
Multi-document summarization entails producing concise synopses of collections of inputs. For some applications, the synopsis should accurately synthesize inputs with respect to a key property or aspect. For example, a synopsis of film reviews all written about a particular movie should reflect the average critic consensus. As a more consequential example, consider narrative summaries that accompany biomedical systematic reviews of clinical trial results. These narratives should fairly summarize the potentially conflicting results from individual trials. In this paper we ask: To what extent do modern multi-document summarization models implicitly perform this type of synthesis? To assess this we perform a suite of experiments that probe the degree to which conditional generation models trained for summarization using standard methods yield outputs that appropriately synthesize inputs. We find that existing models do partially perform synthesis, but do so imperfectly. In particular, they are over-sensitive to changes in input ordering and under-sensitive to changes in input compositions (e.g., the ratio of positive to negative movie reviews). We propose a simple, general method for improving model synthesis capabilities by generating an explicitly diverse set of candidate outputs, and then selecting from these the string best aligned with the expected aggregate measure for the inputs, or abstaining when the model produces no good candidate. This approach improves model synthesis performance. We hope highlighting the need for synthesis (in some summarization settings), motivates further research into multi-document summarization methods and learning objectives that explicitly account for the need to synthesize.
READ FULL TEXT