FaNS: a Facet-based Narrative Similarity Metric
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Similar Narrative Retrieval is a crucial task since narratives are essential for explaining and understanding events, and multiple related narratives often help to create a holistic view of the event of interest. To accurately identify semantically similar narratives, this paper proposes a novel narrative similarity metric called Facet-based Narrative Similarity (FaNS), based on the classic 5W1H facets (Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How), which are extracted by leveraging the state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs). Unlike existing similarity metrics that only focus on overall lexical/semantic match, FaNS provides a more granular matching along six different facets independently and then combines them. To evaluate FaNS, we created a comprehensive dataset by collecting narratives from AllSides, a third-party news portal. Experimental results demonstrate that the FaNS metric exhibits a higher correlation (37% higher) than traditional text similarity metrics that directly measure the lexical/semantic match between narratives, demonstrating its effectiveness in comparing the finer details between a pair of narratives.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Sep 2023.
Builds on
24 of 40 references.
References · 24
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
- 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,323
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
- 2016ConceptNet 5.5: An Open Multilingual Graph of General Knowledgecited by 1,065
- 2022Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineerscited by 1,020
- 2020SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluationcited by 666
- 2023Benchmarking Large Language Models for News Summarizationcited by 444
- 2023Is ChatGPT a Good NLG Evaluator? A Preliminary Studycited by 420
- 2019MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distancecited by 415
- 2023Harnessing the Power of LLMs in Practice: A Survey on ChatGPT and Beyondcited by 409
12 more
- 2020Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of Summariescited by 376
- 2023GPTScore: Evaluate as You Desirecited by 357
- 2020FEQA: A Question Answering Evaluation Framework for Faithfulness Assessment in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 292
- 2022Towards a Unified Multi-Dimensional Evaluator for Text Generationcited by 264
- 2021QuestEval: Summarization Asks for Fact-based Evaluationcited by 241
- 2021QAFactEval: Improved QA-Based Factual Consistency Evaluation for Summarizationcited by 233
- 2017Why We Need New Evaluation Metrics for NLGcited by 232
- 2023Human-like Summarization Evaluation with ChatGPTcited by 126
- 2023TELeR: A General Taxonomy of LLM Prompts for Benchmarking Complex Taskscited by 48
- 2018No Metrics Are Perfect: Adversarial Reward Learning for Visual Storytellingcited by 46
- 2023LLMs as Factual Reasoners: Insights from Existing Benchmarks and Beyondcited by 37
- 2023Redundancy Aware Multi-Reference Based Gainwise Evaluation of Extractive Summarizationcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
3 papers.