Evaluation of Summarization Systems across Gender, Age, and Race
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Summarization systems are ultimately evaluated by human annotators and raters. Usually, annotators and raters do not reflect the demographics of end users, but are recruited through student populations or crowdsourcing platforms with skewed demographics. For two different evaluation scenarios -- evaluation against gold summaries and system output ratings -- we show that summary evaluation is sensitive to protected attributes. This can severely bias system development and evaluation, leading us to build models that cater for some groups rather than others.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Oct 2021.
Builds on
4 of 18 references.
References · 4
- 2020Extractive Summarization as Text Matchingcited by 189
- 2019Sentence Centrality Revisited for Unsupervised Summarizationcited by 64
- 2016Learning-Based Single-Document Summarization with Compression and Anaphoricity Constraintscited by 34
- 2016Variations of the Similarity Function of TextRank for Automated Summarizationcited by 27
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 1.
3 papers.