arXiv · 2206.06383
An Exploration of Post-Editing Effectiveness in Text Summarization
Abstract
Automatic summarization methods are efficient but can suffer from low quality. In comparison, manual summarization is expensive but produces higher quality. Can humans and AI collaborate to improve summarization performance? In similar text generation tasks (e.g., machine translation), human-AI collaboration in the form of "post-editing" AI-generated text reduces human workload and improves the quality of AI output. Therefore, we explored whether post-editing offers advantages in text summarization. Specifically, we conducted an experiment with 72 participants, comparing post-editing provided summaries with manual summarization for summary quality, human efficiency, and user experience on formal (XSum news) and informal (Reddit posts) text. This study sheds valuable insights on when post-editing is useful for text summarization: it helped in some cases (e.g., when participants lacked domain knowledge) but not in others (e.g., when provided summaries include inaccurate information). Participants' different editing strategies and needs for assistance offer implications for future human-AI summarization systems.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Vivian Lai, Alison Smith-Renner, Ke Zhang, Ruijia Cheng, Wenjuan Zhang, Joel Tetreault, Alejandro Jaimes. 2022-06-13. An Exploration of Post-Editing Effectiveness in Text Summarization. https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.06383
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.