Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Abstracting"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Nomoto, T.: Discriminative sentence compression with conditional random fields (2007) 0.01
    0.014965973 = product of:
      0.029931946 = sum of:
        0.029931946 = product of:
          0.05986389 = sum of:
            0.05986389 = weight(_text_:data in 945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05986389 = score(doc=945,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.16488427 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052144732 = queryNorm
                0.3630661 = fieldWeight in 945, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=945)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The paper focuses on a particular approach to automatic sentence compression which makes use of a discriminative sequence classifier known as Conditional Random Fields (CRF). We devise several features for CRF that allow it to incorporate information on nonlinear relations among words. Along with that, we address the issue of data paucity by collecting data from RSS feeds available on the Internet, and turning them into training data for use with CRF, drawing on techniques from biology and information retrieval. We also discuss a recursive application of CRF on the syntactic structure of a sentence as a way of improving the readability of the compression it generates. Experiments found that our approach works reasonably well compared to the state-of-the-art system [Knight, K., & Marcu, D. (2002). Summarization beyond sentence extraction: A probabilistic approach to sentence compression. Artificial Intelligence 139, 91-107.].
  2. Vanderwende, L.; Suzuki, H.; Brockett, J.M.; Nenkova, A.: Beyond SumBasic : task-focused summarization with sentence simplification and lexical expansion (2007) 0.01
    0.010597337 = product of:
      0.021194674 = sum of:
        0.021194674 = product of:
          0.04238935 = sum of:
            0.04238935 = weight(_text_:22 in 948) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04238935 = score(doc=948,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18260197 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052144732 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 948, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=948)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In recent years, there has been increased interest in topic-focused multi-document summarization. In this task, automatic summaries are produced in response to a specific information request, or topic, stated by the user. The system we have designed to accomplish this task comprises four main components: a generic extractive summarization system, a topic-focusing component, sentence simplification, and lexical expansion of topic words. This paper details each of these components, together with experiments designed to quantify their individual contributions. We include an analysis of our results on two large datasets commonly used to evaluate task-focused summarization, the DUC2005 and DUC2006 datasets, using automatic metrics. Additionally, we include an analysis of our results on the DUC2006 task according to human evaluation metrics. In the human evaluation of system summaries compared to human summaries, i.e., the Pyramid method, our system ranked first out of 22 systems in terms of overall mean Pyramid score; and in the human evaluation of summary responsiveness to the topic, our system ranked third out of 35 systems.
  3. Reeve, L.H.; Han, H.; Brooks, A.D.: ¬The use of domain-specific concepts in biomedical text summarization (2007) 0.01
    0.010183054 = product of:
      0.020366108 = sum of:
        0.020366108 = product of:
          0.040732216 = sum of:
            0.040732216 = weight(_text_:data in 955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040732216 = score(doc=955,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16488427 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052144732 = queryNorm
                0.24703519 = fieldWeight in 955, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=955)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Text summarization is a method for data reduction. The use of text summarization enables users to reduce the amount of text that must be read while still assimilating the core information. The data reduction offered by text summarization is particularly useful in the biomedical domain, where physicians must continuously find clinical trial study information to incorporate into their patient treatment efforts. Such efforts are often hampered by the high-volume of publications. This paper presents two independent methods (BioChain and FreqDist) for identifying salient sentences in biomedical texts using concepts derived from domain-specific resources. Our semantic-based method (BioChain) is effective at identifying thematic sentences, while our frequency-distribution method (FreqDist) removes information redundancy. The two methods are then combined to form a hybrid method (ChainFreq). An evaluation of each method is performed using the ROUGE system to compare system-generated summaries against a set of manually-generated summaries. The BioChain and FreqDist methods outperform some common summarization systems, while the ChainFreq method improves upon the base approaches. Our work shows that the best performance is achieved when the two methods are combined. The paper also presents a brief physician's evaluation of three randomly-selected papers from an evaluation corpus to show that the author's abstract does not always reflect the entire contents of the full-text.
  4. Wu, Y.-f.B.; Li, Q.; Bot, R.S.; Chen, X.: Finding nuggets in documents : a machine learning approach (2006) 0.01
    0.0088311145 = product of:
      0.017662229 = sum of:
        0.017662229 = product of:
          0.035324458 = sum of:
            0.035324458 = weight(_text_:22 in 5290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035324458 = score(doc=5290,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18260197 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052144732 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5290, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5290)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:25:48
  5. Haag, M.: Automatic text summarization : Evaluation des Copernic Summarizer und mögliche Einsatzfelder in der Fachinformation der DaimlerCrysler AG (2002) 0.01
    0.008640608 = product of:
      0.017281216 = sum of:
        0.017281216 = product of:
          0.03456243 = sum of:
            0.03456243 = weight(_text_:data in 649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03456243 = score(doc=649,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16488427 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052144732 = queryNorm
                0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 649, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=649)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    An evaluation of the Copernic Summarizer, a software for automatically summarizing text in various data formats, is being presented. It shall be assessed if and how the Copernic Summarizer can reasonably be used in the DaimlerChrysler Information Division in order to enhance the quality of its information services. First, an introduction into Automatic Text Summarization is given and the Copernic Summarizer is being presented. Various methods for evaluating Automatic Text Summarization systems and software ergonomics are presented. Two evaluation forms are developed with which the employees of the Information Division shall evaluate the quality and relevance of the extracted keywords and summaries as well as the software's usability. The quality and relevance assessment is done by comparing the original text to the summaries. Finally, a recommendation is given concerning the use of the Copernic Summarizer.
  6. Liang, S.-F.; Devlin, S.; Tait, J.: Investigating sentence weighting components for automatic summarisation (2007) 0.01
    0.008640608 = product of:
      0.017281216 = sum of:
        0.017281216 = product of:
          0.03456243 = sum of:
            0.03456243 = weight(_text_:data in 899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03456243 = score(doc=899,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16488427 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052144732 = queryNorm
                0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 899, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=899)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The work described here initially formed part of a triangulation exercise to establish the effectiveness of the Query Term Order algorithm. It subsequently proved to be a reliable indicator for summarising English web documents. We utilised the human summaries from the Document Understanding Conference data, and generated queries automatically for testing the QTO algorithm. Six sentence weighting schemes that made use of Query Term Frequency and QTO were constructed to produce system summaries, and this paper explains the process of combining and balancing the weighting components. The summaries produced were evaluated by the ROUGE-1 metric, and the results showed that using QTO in a weighting combination resulted in the best performance. We also found that using a combination of more weighting components always produced improved performance compared to any single weighting component.
  7. Yeh, J.-Y.; Ke, H.-R.; Yang, W.-P.; Meng, I.-H.: Text summarization using a trainable summarizer and latent semantic analysis (2005) 0.01
    0.007200507 = product of:
      0.014401014 = sum of:
        0.014401014 = product of:
          0.028802028 = sum of:
            0.028802028 = weight(_text_:data in 1003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028802028 = score(doc=1003,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16488427 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052144732 = queryNorm
                0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 1003, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1003)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper proposes two approaches to address text summarization: modified corpus-based approach (MCBA) and LSA-based T.R.M. approach (LSA + T.R.M.). The first is a trainable summarizer, which takes into account several features, including position, positive keyword, negative keyword, centrality, and the resemblance to the title, to generate summaries. Two new ideas are exploited: (1) sentence positions are ranked to emphasize the significances of different sentence positions, and (2) the score function is trained by the genetic algorithm (GA) to obtain a suitable combination of feature weights. The second uses latent semantic analysis (LSA) to derive the semantic matrix of a document or a corpus and uses semantic sentence representation to construct a semantic text relationship map. We evaluate LSA + T.R.M. both with single documents and at the corpus level to investigate the competence of LSA in text summarization. The two novel approaches were measured at several compression rates on a data corpus composed of 100 political articles. When the compression rate was 30%, an average f-measure of 49% for MCBA, 52% for MCBA + GA, 44% and 40% for LSA + T.R.M. in single-document and corpus level were achieved respectively.
  8. Dunlavy, D.M.; O'Leary, D.P.; Conroy, J.M.; Schlesinger, J.D.: QCS: A system for querying, clustering and summarizing documents (2007) 0.01
    0.005760405 = product of:
      0.01152081 = sum of:
        0.01152081 = product of:
          0.02304162 = sum of:
            0.02304162 = weight(_text_:data in 947) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02304162 = score(doc=947,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16488427 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052144732 = queryNorm
                0.1397442 = fieldWeight in 947, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=947)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Information retrieval systems consist of many complicated components. Research and development of such systems is often hampered by the difficulty in evaluating how each particular component would behave across multiple systems. We present a novel integrated information retrieval system-the Query, Cluster, Summarize (QCS) system-which is portable, modular, and permits experimentation with different instantiations of each of the constituent text analysis components. Most importantly, the combination of the three types of methods in the QCS design improves retrievals by providing users more focused information organized by topic. We demonstrate the improved performance by a series of experiments using standard test sets from the Document Understanding Conferences (DUC) as measured by the best known automatic metric for summarization system evaluation, ROUGE. Although the DUC data and evaluations were originally designed to test multidocument summarization, we developed a framework to extend it to the task of evaluation for each of the three components: query, clustering, and summarization. Under this framework, we then demonstrate that the QCS system (end-to-end) achieves performance as good as or better than the best summarization engines. Given a query, QCS retrieves relevant documents, separates the retrieved documents into topic clusters, and creates a single summary for each cluster. In the current implementation, Latent Semantic Indexing is used for retrieval, generalized spherical k-means is used for the document clustering, and a method coupling sentence "trimming" and a hidden Markov model, followed by a pivoted QR decomposition, is used to create a single extract summary for each cluster. The user interface is designed to provide access to detailed information in a compact and useful format. Our system demonstrates the feasibility of assembling an effective IR system from existing software libraries, the usefulness of the modularity of the design, and the value of this particular combination of modules.