arXiv subjects

Nikhil Reddy Pottanigari

Publications and source records attributed to Nikhil Reddy Pottanigari.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Preserving What Matters: Semantic Scaffolds Beyond Saturation in Summarization Evaluation

Summarization ships in countless production systems, making model selection a routine decision that depends on measuring summary quality. Existing metrics struggle to support this: ROUGE captures only surface overlap, while LLM-as-judge scores saturate to near-identical values that fail to rank models effectively. We observe this saturation across three public datasets, two proprietary datasets, and multilingual settings. Motivated by this, we introduce Semantic Scaffold, an evaluation framework that extracts a hierarchical representation of facts, questions, and entity attributes from a source text, labeling each as a main point or supporting detail, and reusing this structure as a fixed reference for scoring summaries. From this representation, we derive three diagnostic metrics: Fact Preservation Score (FPS), Question Preservation Score (QPS), and Entity Preservation Score (EPS), designed to reward the preservation of essential information while penalizing detail overload, and position them as interpretable diagnostics that remain informative where holistic axes collapse. Finally, we analyze four recurring failure modes of ROUGE and LLM-as-judge scores, demonstrating that scaffold-based evaluation remains informative where conventional metrics collapse.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Splitting Documents at Lower Cost: Multi-Split Boundary Decisions for LLM-Based Page Stream Segmentation

Scanned mail, uploaded PDFs, and consolidated attachments often arrive as page streams that must be split into individual documents before downstream classification, extraction, or routing. Zero-shot large language models can detect document boundaries without task-specific training, but standard Page Classification (PC) and Boundary Decision (BD) formulations resolve only one boundary per model call. We introduce Multi-Split Boundary Decision (MSBD), which predicts multiple boundaries within a page window in a single call, reducing the number of inference requests. We evaluate MSBD across multiple language models, document collections, input modalities, and window sizes. The results reveal a model- and corpus-dependent operating range in which MSBD preserves strong segmentation accuracy while substantially improving inference efficiency, followed by a sharp decline at larger windows. MSBD provided the strongest overall accuracy--efficiency trade-off, while large windows expose distinct over- and under-segmentation behavior across models. These findings show that multi-boundary prediction can make zero-shot page stream segmentation more efficient when the window size is selected for the target corpus.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Text, Pixels, or Both? Evaluating Input Representations for Multimodal Document QA

Every document QA system begins with a choice that is rarely studied on its own: whether to feed the model page images, extracted text, or both. We isolate this choice, holding the prompt, judge, and scoring pipeline fixed, across four commercial model endpoints, two corpora, and two context regimes (gold evidence pages and the full document). On documents that fit the image budget, page images lead on accuracy at every document length on both corpora, but this advantage carries a growing latency and cost premium: text latency stays roughly flat as documents lengthen while image latency rises steadily. Text and images also fail on different questions, with exactly one representation correct on 19--25% of items across the reported cells, so neither subsumes the other. Exploiting this complementarity, a lightweight TF-IDF router that reads only the question text gains 2.6 points over always-text while cutting median latency 30% relative to always-vision, on a document-disjoint held-out split.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

Robots in the Middle: Evaluating LLMs in Dispute Resolution

Mediation is a dispute resolution method featuring a neutral third-party (mediator) who intervenes to help the individuals resolve their dispute. In this paper, we investigate to which extent large language models (LLMs) are able to act as mediators. We investigate whether LLMs are able to analyze dispute conversations, select suitable intervention types, and generate appropriate intervention messages. Using a novel, manually created dataset of 50 dispute scenarios, we conduct a blind evaluation comparing LLMs with human annotators across several key metrics. Overall, the LLMs showed strong performance, even outperforming our human annotators across dimensions. Specifically, in 62% of the cases, the LLMs chose intervention types that were rated as better than or equivalent to those chosen by humans. Moreover, in 84% of the cases, the intervention messages generated by the LLMs were rated as better than or equal to the intervention messages written by humans. LLMs likewise performed favourably on metrics such as impartiality, understanding and contextualization. Our results demonstrate the potential of integrating AI in online dispute resolution (ODR) platforms.

cs.HC↗