Search (55 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Automatisches Abstracting"
  1. Maybury, M.T.: Generating summaries from event data (1995) 0.04 
    0.03959743 = product of:
  0.07919486 = sum of:
    0.053759433 = weight(_text_:data in 2349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053759433 = score(doc=2349,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.3630661 = fieldWeight in 2349, 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=2349)
    0.025435425 = product of:
      0.05087085 = sum of:
        0.05087085 = weight(_text_:processing in 2349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05087085 = score(doc=2349,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 2349, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2349)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Summarization entails analysis of source material, selection of key information, condensation of this, and generation of a compct summary form. While there habe been many investigations into the automatic summarization of text, relatively little attention has been given to the summarization of information from structured information sources such as data of knowledge bases, despite this being a desirable capability for a number of application areas including report generation from databases (e.g. weather, financial, medical) and simulation (e.g. military, manufacturing, aconomic). After a brief introduction indicating the main elements of summarization and referring to some illustrative approaches to it, considers pecific issues in the generation of text summaries of event data, describes a system, SumGen, which selects key information from an event database by reasoning about event frequencies, frequencies of relations between events, and domain specific importance measures. Describes how Sum Gen then aggregates similar information and plans a summary presentations tailored to stereotypical users
    Source
    Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.5, S.735-751
  2. Nomoto, T.: Discriminative sentence compression with conditional random fields (2007) 0.04 
    0.03959743 = product of:
  0.07919486 = sum of:
    0.053759433 = weight(_text_:data in 945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053759433 = score(doc=945,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = 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)
    0.025435425 = product of:
      0.05087085 = sum of:
        0.05087085 = weight(_text_:processing in 945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05087085 = score(doc=945,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 945, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=945)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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.].
    Source
    Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.6, S.1571-1587
  3. Robin, J.; McKeown, K.: Empirically designing and evaluating a new revision-based model for summary generation (1996) 0.03 
    0.03338095 = product of:
  0.0667619 = sum of:
    0.04138403 = weight(_text_:data in 6751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04138403 = score(doc=6751,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.2794884 = fieldWeight in 6751, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6751)
    0.025377871 = product of:
      0.050755743 = sum of:
        0.050755743 = weight(_text_:22 in 6751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050755743 = score(doc=6751,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6751, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6751)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Presents a system for summarizing quantitative data in natural language, focusing on the use of a corpus of basketball game summaries, drawn from online news services, to empirically shape the system design and to evaluate the approach. Initial corpus analysis revealed characteristics of textual summaries that challenge the capabilities of current language generation systems. A revision based corpus analysis was used to identify and encode the revision rules of the system. Presents a quantitative evaluation, using several test corpora, to measure the robustness of the new revision based model
    Date
    6. 3.1997 16:22:15
  4. Reeve, L.H.; Han, H.; Brooks, A.D.: ¬The use of domain-specific concepts in biomedical text summarization (2007) 0.03 
    0.028887425 = product of:
  0.05777485 = sum of:
    0.03657866 = weight(_text_:data in 955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03657866 = score(doc=955,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = 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)
    0.021196188 = product of:
      0.042392377 = sum of:
        0.042392377 = weight(_text_:processing in 955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042392377 = score(doc=955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=955)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.6, S.1765-1776
  5. Moens, M.-F.; Uyttendaele, C.: Automatic text structuring and categorization as a first step in summarizing legal cases (1997) 0.03 
    0.028236724 = product of:
  0.05647345 = sum of:
    0.031038022 = weight(_text_:data in 2256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031038022 = score(doc=2256,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 2256, 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=2256)
    0.025435425 = product of:
      0.05087085 = sum of:
        0.05087085 = weight(_text_:processing in 2256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05087085 = score(doc=2256,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 2256, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2256)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The SALOMON system automatically summarizes Belgian criminal cases in order to improve access to the large number of existing and future court decisions. SALOMON extracts relevant text units from the case text to form a case summary. Such a case profile facilitates the rapid determination of the relevance of the case or may be employed in text search. In a first important abstracting step SALOMON performs an initial categorization of legal criminal cases and structures the case text into separate legally relevant and irrelevant components. A text grammar represented as a semantic network is used to automatically determine the category of the case and its components. Extracts from the case general data and identifies text portions relevant for further abstracting. Prior knowledge of the text structure and its indicative cues may support automatic abstracting. A text grammar is a promising form for representing the knowledge involved
    Source
    Information processing and management. 33(1997) no.6, S.727-737
  6. Liang, S.-F.; Devlin, S.; Tait, J.: Investigating sentence weighting components for automatic summarisation (2007) 0.03 
    0.028236724 = product of:
  0.05647345 = sum of:
    0.031038022 = weight(_text_:data in 899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031038022 = score(doc=899,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = 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)
    0.025435425 = product of:
      0.05087085 = sum of:
        0.05087085 = weight(_text_:processing in 899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05087085 = score(doc=899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 899, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=899)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.1, S.146-153
  7. Xu, D.; Cheng, G.; Qu, Y.: Preferences in Wikipedia abstracts : empirical findings and implications for automatic entity summarization (2014) 0.03 
    0.028236724 = product of:
  0.05647345 = sum of:
    0.031038022 = weight(_text_:data in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031038022 = score(doc=2700,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 2700, 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=2700)
    0.025435425 = product of:
      0.05087085 = sum of:
        0.05087085 = weight(_text_:processing in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05087085 = score(doc=2700,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 2700, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2700)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The volume of entity-centric structured data grows rapidly on the Web. The description of an entity, composed of property-value pairs (a.k.a. features), has become very large in many applications. To avoid information overload, efforts have been made to automatically select a limited number of features to be shown to the user based on certain criteria, which is called automatic entity summarization. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is a lack of extensive studies on how humans rank and select features in practice, which can provide empirical support and inspire future research. In this article, we present a large-scale statistical analysis of the descriptions of entities provided by DBpedia and the abstracts of their corresponding Wikipedia articles, to empirically study, along several different dimensions, which kinds of features are preferable when humans summarize. Implications for automatic entity summarization are drawn from the findings.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 50(2014) no.2, S.284-296
  8. Yeh, J.-Y.; Ke, H.-R.; Yang, W.-P.; Meng, I.-H.: Text summarization using a trainable summarizer and latent semantic analysis (2005) 0.02 
    0.023530604 = product of:
  0.04706121 = sum of:
    0.02586502 = weight(_text_:data in 1003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02586502 = score(doc=1003,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = 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)
    0.021196188 = product of:
      0.042392377 = sum of:
        0.042392377 = weight(_text_:processing in 1003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042392377 = score(doc=1003,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 1003, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1003)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.1, S.75-95
  9. Vanderwende, L.; Suzuki, H.; Brockett, J.M.; Nenkova, A.: Beyond SumBasic : task-focused summarization with sentence simplification and lexical expansion (2007) 0.02 
    0.022234414 = product of:
  0.088937655 = sum of:
    0.088937655 = sum of:
      0.05087085 = weight(_text_:processing in 948) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05087085 = score(doc=948,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = queryNorm
          0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 948, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=948)
      0.038066804 = weight(_text_:22 in 948) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.038066804 = score(doc=948,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    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.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.6, S.1606-1618
  10. Oh, H.; Nam, S.; Zhu, Y.: Structured abstract summarization of scientific articles : summarization using full-text section information (2023) 0.02 
    0.020863095 = product of:
  0.04172619 = sum of:
    0.02586502 = weight(_text_:data in 889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02586502 = score(doc=889,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 889, 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=889)
    0.01586117 = product of:
      0.03172234 = sum of:
        0.03172234 = weight(_text_:22 in 889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03172234 = score(doc=889,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 889, 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=889)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The automatic summarization of scientific articles differs from other text genres because of the structured format and longer text length. Previous approaches have focused on tackling the lengthy nature of scientific articles, aiming to improve the computational efficiency of summarizing long text using a flat, unstructured abstract. However, the structured format of scientific articles and characteristics of each section have not been fully explored, despite their importance. The lack of a sufficient investigation and discussion of various characteristics for each section and their influence on summarization results has hindered the practical use of automatic summarization for scientific articles. To provide a balanced abstract proportionally emphasizing each section of a scientific article, the community introduced the structured abstract, an abstract with distinct, labeled sections. Using this information, in this study, we aim to understand tasks ranging from data preparation to model evaluation from diverse viewpoints. Specifically, we provide a preprocessed large-scale dataset and propose a summarization method applying the introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRaD) format reflecting the characteristics of each section. We also discuss the objective benchmarks and perspectives of state-of-the-art algorithms and present the challenges and research directions in this area.
    Date
    22. 1.2023 18:57:12
  11. Dunlavy, D.M.; O'Leary, D.P.; Conroy, J.M.; Schlesinger, J.D.: QCS: A system for querying, clustering and summarizing documents (2007) 0.02 
    0.018824484 = product of:
  0.03764897 = sum of:
    0.020692015 = weight(_text_:data in 947) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020692015 = score(doc=947,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = 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)
    0.016956951 = product of:
      0.033913903 = sum of:
        0.033913903 = weight(_text_:processing in 947) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033913903 = score(doc=947,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.17890452 = fieldWeight in 947, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=947)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.6, S.1588-1605
  12. Jiang, Y.; Meng, R.; Huang, Y.; Lu, W.; Liu, J.: Generating keyphrases for readers : a controllable keyphrase generation framework (2023) 0.02 
    0.01852868 = product of:
  0.07411472 = sum of:
    0.07411472 = sum of:
      0.042392377 = weight(_text_:processing in 1012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042392377 = score(doc=1012,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = queryNorm
          0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 1012, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1012)
      0.03172234 = weight(_text_:22 in 1012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03172234 = score(doc=1012,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046827413 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1012, 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=1012)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    With the wide application of keyphrases in many Information Retrieval (IR) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks, automatic keyphrase prediction has been emerging. However, these statistically important phrases are contributing increasingly less to the related tasks because the end-to-end learning mechanism enables models to learn the important semantic information of the text directly. Similarly, keyphrases are of little help for readers to quickly grasp the paper's main idea because the relationship between the keyphrase and the paper is not explicit to readers. Therefore, we propose to generate keyphrases with specific functions for readers to bridge the semantic gap between them and the information producers, and verify the effectiveness of the keyphrase function for assisting users' comprehension with a user experiment. A controllable keyphrase generation framework (the CKPG) that uses the keyphrase function as a control code to generate categorized keyphrases is proposed and implemented based on Transformer, BART, and T5, respectively. For the Computer Science domain, the Macro-avgs of , , and on the Paper with Code dataset are up to 0.680, 0.535, and 0.558, respectively. Our experimental results indicate the effectiveness of the CKPG models.
    Date
    22. 6.2023 14:55:20
  13. Craven, T.C.: Presentation of repeated phrases in a computer-assisted abstracting tool kit (2001) 0.01 
    0.014837332 = product of:
  0.05934933 = sum of:
    0.05934933 = product of:
      0.11869866 = sum of:
        0.11869866 = weight(_text_:processing in 3667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11869866 = score(doc=3667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.6261658 = fieldWeight in 3667, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3667)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 37(2001) no.2, S.221-230
  14. Bateman, J.; Teich, E.: Selective information presentation in an integrated publication system : an application of genre-driven text generation (1995) 0.01 
    0.014837332 = product of:
  0.05934933 = sum of:
    0.05934933 = product of:
      0.11869866 = sum of:
        0.11869866 = weight(_text_:processing in 2928) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11869866 = score(doc=2928,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.6261658 = fieldWeight in 2928, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2928)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.5, S.753-767
  15. Endres-Niggemeyer, B.: SimSum : an empirically founded simulation of summarizing (2000) 0.01 
    0.014837332 = product of:
  0.05934933 = sum of:
    0.05934933 = product of:
      0.11869866 = sum of:
        0.11869866 = weight(_text_:processing in 3343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11869866 = score(doc=3343,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.6261658 = fieldWeight in 3343, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3343)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.4, S.659-682
  16. Johnson, F.C.; Paice, C.D.; Black, W.J.; Neal, A.P.: ¬The application of linguistic processing to automatic abstract generation (1993) 0.01 
    0.010598094 = product of:
  0.042392377 = sum of:
    0.042392377 = product of:
      0.08478475 = sum of:
        0.08478475 = weight(_text_:processing in 2290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08478475 = score(doc=2290,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.4472613 = fieldWeight in 2290, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2290)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
  17. McKeown, K.; Robin, J.; Kukich, K.: Generating concise natural language summaries (1995) 0.01 
    0.010598094 = product of:
  0.042392377 = sum of:
    0.042392377 = product of:
      0.08478475 = sum of:
        0.08478475 = weight(_text_:processing in 2932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08478475 = score(doc=2932,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.4472613 = fieldWeight in 2932, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2932)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.5, S.703-733
  18. Endres-Niggemeyer, B.; Maier, E.; Sigel, A.: How to implement a naturalistic model of abstracting : four core working steps of an expert abstractor (1995) 0.01 
    0.010491579 = product of:
  0.041966315 = sum of:
    0.041966315 = product of:
      0.08393263 = sum of:
        0.08393263 = weight(_text_:processing in 2930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08393263 = score(doc=2930,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.4427661 = fieldWeight in 2930, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2930)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    4 working steps taken from a comprehensive empirical model of expert abstracting are studied in order to prepare an explorative implementation of a simulation model. It aims at explaining the knowledge processing activities during professional summarizing. Following the case-based and holistic strategy of qualitative empirical research, the main features of the simulation system were developed by investigating in detail a small but central test case - 4 working steps where an expert abstractor discovers what the paper is about and drafts the topic sentence of the abstract
    Source
    Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.5, S.631-674
  19. Ouyang, Y.; Li, W.; Li, S.; Lu, Q.: Intertopic information mining for query-based summarization (2010) 0.01 
    0.009144665 = product of:
  0.03657866 = sum of:
    0.03657866 = weight(_text_:data in 3459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03657866 = score(doc=3459,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.24703519 = fieldWeight in 3459, 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=3459)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    In this article, the authors address the problem of sentence ranking in summarization. Although most existing summarization approaches are concerned with the information embodied in a particular topic (including a set of documents and an associated query) for sentence ranking, they propose a novel ranking approach that incorporates intertopic information mining. Intertopic information, in contrast to intratopic information, is able to reveal pairwise topic relationships and thus can be considered as the bridge across different topics. In this article, the intertopic information is used for transferring word importance learned from known topics to unknown topics under a learning-based summarization framework. To mine this information, the authors model the topic relationship by clustering all the words in both known and unknown topics according to various kinds of word conceptual labels, which indicate the roles of the words in the topic. Based on the mined relationships, we develop a probabilistic model using manually generated summaries provided for known topics to predict ranking scores for sentences in unknown topics. A series of experiments have been conducted on the Document Understanding Conference (DUC) 2006 data set. The evaluation results show that intertopic information is indeed effective for sentence ranking and the resultant summarization system performs comparably well to the best-performing DUC participating systems on the same data set.
  20. Wang, S.; Koopman, R.: Embed first, then predict (2019) 0.01 
    0.009144665 = product of:
  0.03657866 = sum of:
    0.03657866 = weight(_text_:data in 5400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03657866 = score(doc=5400,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.24703519 = fieldWeight in 5400, 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=5400)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Automatic subject prediction is a desirable feature for modern digital library systems, as manual indexing can no longer cope with the rapid growth of digital collections. It is also desirable to be able to identify a small set of entities (e.g., authors, citations, bibliographic records) which are most relevant to a query. This gets more difficult when the amount of data increases dramatically. Data sparsity and model scalability are the major challenges to solving this type of extreme multilabel classification problem automatically. In this paper, we propose to address this problem in two steps: we first embed different types of entities into the same semantic space, where similarity could be computed easily; second, we propose a novel non-parametric method to identify the most relevant entities in addition to direct semantic similarities. We show how effectively this approach predicts even very specialised subjects, which are associated with few documents in the training set and are more problematic for a classifier.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 54
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 53
  • m 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes