A Critical Look at Meta-evaluating Summarisation Evaluation Metrics

Effective summarisation evaluation metrics enable researchers and practitioners to compare different summarisation systems efficiently. Estimating the effectiveness of an automatic evaluation metric, termed meta-evaluation, is a critically important research question. In this position paper, we review recent meta-evaluation practices for summarisation evaluation metrics and find that (1) evaluation metrics are primarily meta-evaluated on datasets consisting of examples from news summarisation datasets, and (2) there has been a noticeable shift in research focus towards evaluating the faithfulness of generated summaries. We argue that the time is ripe to build more diverse benchmarks that enable the development of more robust evaluation metrics and analyze the generalization ability of existing evaluation metrics. In addition, we call for research focusing on user-centric quality dimensions that consider the generated summary's communicative goal and the role of summarisation in the workflow.

COVID-SEE: Scientific Evidence Explorer for COVID-19 Related Research

We present COVID-SEE, a system for medical literature discovery based on the concept of information exploration, which builds on several distinct text analysis and natural language processing methods to structure and organise information in publications, and augments search by providing a visual overview supporting exploration of a collection to identify key articles of interest. We developed this system over COVID-19 literature to help medical professionals and researchers explore the literature evidence, and improve findability of relevant information. COVID-SEE is available at http://covid-see.com.