# Is the Top Still Spinning? Evaluating Subjectivity in Narrative Understanding

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.01132 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.01132/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 33 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 1 Apr 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 33)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14251/) (2023)
- [STaR: Bootstrapping Reasoning With Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.14465/) (2022)
- [Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08935/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.05782/) (2023)
- [SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.12626/) (2020)
- [SummaC: Re-Visiting NLI-based Models for Inconsistency Detection in Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.09525/) (2021)
- [FEQA: A Question Answering Evaluation Framework for Faithfulness Assessment in Abstractive Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.03754/) (2020)
- [RARR: Researching and Revising What Language Models Say, Using Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.08726/) (2022)
- [MiniCheck: Efficient Fact-Checking of LLMs on Grounding Documents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.10774/) (2024)
- [BookSum: A Collection of Datasets for Long-form Narrative Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.08209/) (2021)
- [What Can We Learn from Collective Human Opinions on Natural Language Inference Data?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03532/) (2020)
- [Fine-grained Hallucination Detection and Editing for Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.06855/) (2024)
- [BooookScore: A systematic exploration of book-length summarization in the era of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.00785/) (2023)
- [LongEval: Guidelines for Human Evaluation of Faithfulness in Long-form Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.13298/) (2023)
- [One Thousand and One Pairs: A "novel" challenge for long-context language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.16264/) (2024)
- [SummScreen: A Dataset for Abstractive Screenplay Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.07091/) (2021)
- [FELM: Benchmarking Factuality Evaluation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.00741/) (2023)
- [FABLES: Evaluating faithfulness and content selection in book-length summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.01261/) (2024)
- [SummIt: Iterative Text Summarization via ChatGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14835/) (2023)
- [ChatGLM-Math: Improving Math Problem-Solving in Large Language Models with a Self-Critique Pipeline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.02893/) (2024)
- [LLMRefine: Pinpointing and Refining Large Language Models via Fine-Grained Actionable Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09336/) (2023)
- [On Improving Summarization Factual Consistency from Natural Language Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09968/) (2022)
- [Exploring Content Selection in Summarization of Novel Chapters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.01840/) (2020)
- [Investigating Reasons for Disagreement in Natural Language Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.03392/) (2022)
- [Learning to Refine with Fine-Grained Natural Language Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.02397/) (2024)
- [Analyzing LLM Behavior in Dialogue Summarization: Unveiling Circumstantial Hallucination Trends](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.03487/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Determining faithfulness of a claim to a source document is an important problem across many domains. This task is generally treated as a binary judgment of whether the claim is supported or unsupported in relation to the source. In many cases, though, whether a claim is supported can be ambiguous. For instance, it may depend on making inferences from given evidence, and different people can reasonably interpret the claim as either supported or unsupported based on their agreement with those inferences. Forcing binary labels upon such claims lowers the reliability of evaluation. In this work, we reframe the task to manage the subjectivity involved with factuality judgments of ambiguous claims. We introduce LLM-generated edits of summaries as a method of providing a nuanced evaluation of claims: how much does a summary need to be edited to be unambiguous? Whether a claim gets rewritten and how much it changes can be used as an automatic evaluation metric, the Ambiguity Rewrite Metric (ARM), with a much richer feedback signal than a binary judgment of faithfulness. We focus on the area of narrative summarization as it is particularly rife with ambiguity and subjective interpretation. We show that ARM produces a 21% absolute improvement in annotator agreement on claim faithfulness, indicating that subjectivity is reduced.