Paper detail

Abstractive and mixed summarization for long-single documents

The lack of diversity in the datasets available for automatic summarization of documents has meant that the vast majority of neural models for automatic summarization have been trained with news articles. These datasets are relatively small, with an average size of about 600 words, and the models trained with such data sets see their performance limited to short documents. In order to surmount this problem, this paper uses scientific papers as the dataset on which different models are trained. These models have been chosen based on their performance on the CNN/Daily Mail data set, so that the highest ranked model of each architectural variant is selected. In this work, six different models are compared, two with an RNN architecture, one with a CNN architecture, two with a Transformer architecture and one with a Transformer architecture combined with reinforcement learning. The results from this work show that those models that use a hierarchical encoder to model the structure of the document has a better performance than the rest.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.