Learning with Rejection for Abstractive Text Summarization
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
State-of-the-art abstractive summarization systems frequently hallucinate content that is not supported by the source document, mainly due to noise in the training dataset. Existing methods opt to drop the noisy samples or tokens from the training set entirely, reducing the effective training set size and creating an artificial propensity to copy words from the source. In this work, we propose a training objective for abstractive summarization based on rejection learning, in which the model learns whether or not to reject potentially noisy tokens. We further propose a regularized decoding objective that penalizes non-factual candidate summaries during inference by using the rejection probability learned during training. We show that our method considerably improves the factuality of generated summaries in automatic and human evaluations when compared to five baseline models and that it does so while increasing the abstractiveness of the generated summaries.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Feb 2023.
Builds on
28 of 39 references.
References · 28
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,874
- 2018Don't Give Me the Details, Just the Summary! Topic-Aware Convolutional Neural Networks for Extreme Summarizationcited by 1,308
- 2019PEGASUS: Pre-training with Extracted Gap-sentences for Abstractive Summarizationcited by 1,100
- 2020On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 895
- 2019Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 578
- 2018Newsroom: A Dataset of 1.3 Million Summaries with Diverse Extractive Strategiescited by 292
- 2020FEQA: A Question Answering Evaluation Framework for Faithfulness Assessment in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 292
- 2021Understanding Factuality in Abstractive Summarization with FRANK: A Benchmark for Factuality Metricscited by 285
- 2020ProphetNet: Predicting Future N-gram for Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-trainingcited by 221
- 2019Neural Text Summarization: A Critical Evaluationcited by 189
- 2021The Curious Case of Hallucinations in Neural Machine Translationcited by 161
16 more
- 2022BRIO: Bringing Order to Abstractive Summarizationcited by 161
- 2022On the Origin of Hallucinations in Conversational Models: Is it the Datasets or the Models?cited by 137
- 2021Annotating and Modeling Fine-grained Factuality in Summarizationcited by 131
- 2021SimCLS: A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Abstractive Summarizationcited by 131
- 2021Hallucinated but Factual! Inspecting the Factuality of Hallucinations in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 128
- 2021Entity-level Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 118
- 2019On NMT Search Errors and Model Errors: Cat Got Your Tongue?cited by 114
- 2020Factual Error Correction for Abstractive Summarization Modelscited by 108
- 2019Combating Label Noise in Deep Learning Using Abstentioncited by 86
- 2020Improved Natural Language Generation via Loss Truncationcited by 75
- 2021Planning with Learned Entity Prompts for Abstractive Summarizationcited by 75
- 2020Multi-Fact Correction in Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 66
- 2020Text Generation by Learning from Demonstrationscited by 64
- 2021Faithful or Extractive? On Mitigating the Faithfulness-Abstractiveness Trade-off in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 50
- 2021Training Dynamics for Text Summarization Modelscited by 25
- 2022Faithful to the Document or to the World? Mitigating Hallucinations via Entity-linked Knowledge in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 20
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 0; 2025: 1.
3 papers.
- 2023Detecting and Mitigating Hallucinations in Multilingual Summarisationcited by 48
- 2023Teaching Language Models to Hallucinate Less with Synthetic Taskscited by 31
- 2025Beyond Next Token Probabilities: Learnable, Fast Detection of Hallucinations and Data Contamination on LLM Output Distributionscited by 11
- 2025Beyond Next Token Probabilities: Learnable, Fast Detection of Hallucinations and Data Contamination on LLM Output Distributions18 Mar 2025
- 2023Teaching Language Models to Hallucinate Less with Synthetic Tasks10 Oct 2023
- 2023Detecting and Mitigating Hallucinations in Multilingual Summarisation23 May 2023