Abstract
This paper advocates deeper summarisation methods: methods that are closer to text understanding; methods that manipulate intermediate semantic representations. As a field, we are not yet in a position to create these representations perfectly, but I still believe that now is a good time to be a bit more ambitious again in our goals for summarisation. I think that a summariser should be able to provide some form of explanation for the summary it just created; and if we want those types of summarisers, we will have to start manipulating semantic representations.
Considering the state of the art in NLP in 2016, I believe that the field is ready for a second attempt at going deeper in summarisation. We NLP folk have come a long way since the days of early AI research. Twenty-five years of statistical research in NLP have given us more robust, more informative processing of many aspects of semantics – such as semantic similarity and relatedness between words (and maybe larger things), semantic role labelling, co-reference resolution, and sentiment detection. Now, with these new tools under our belt, we can try again to create the right kind of intermediate representations for summarisation, and then do something exciting with them. Of course, exactly how is a very big question. In this opinion paper, I will bring forward some suggestions, by taking a second look at historical summarisation models from the era of Strong AI. These may have been over-ambitious back then, but people still talk about them now because of their explanatory power: they make statements about which meaning units in a text are always important, and why.
I will discuss two 1980s models for text understanding and summarisation (Wendy Lehnert’s Plot Units, and Kintsch and van Dijk’s memory-restricted discourse structure), both of which have recently been revived by their first modern implementations. The implementation of Plot Unit-style affect analysis is by Goyal et al. (2013), the KvD implementation is by my student Yimai Fang, using a new corpus of language learner texts (Fang and Teufel 2014). Looking at those systems, I will argue that even an imperfect deeper summariser is exciting news.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Androutsopoulos, I., Malakasiotis, P.: A survey of paraphrasing and textual entailment methods. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 38, 135–187 (2010)
Baker, C.F., Fillmore, C.J., Lowe, J.B.: The Berkeley framenet project. In: Proceedings COLING, pp. 86–90 (1998)
Baroni, M., Lenci, A.: Distributional memory: a general framework for corpus-based semantics. Comput. Linguist. 36(4), 673–721 (2010)
Barzilay, R., Lee, L.: Learning to paraphrase: an unsupervised approach using multiple-sequence alignment. In: Proceedings of HLT, pp. 16–23 (2003)
Bauer, S., Teufel, S.: A methodology for evaluating timeline generation algorithms based on deep semantic units. In: Proceedings of ACL, p. 834 (2015)
Björkelund, A., Farkas, R.: Data-driven multilingual coreference resolution using resolver stacking. In: Joint Conference on EMNLP and CoNLL-Shared Task, pp. 49–55 (2012)
Carbonell, J., Goldstein, J.: The use of MMR, diversity-based reranking for reordering documents and producing summaries. In: Proceedings of SIGIR, pp. 335–336 (1998)
Chambers, N., Jurafsky, D.: Unsupervised learning of narrative schemas and their participants. In: Proceedings of ACL, pp. 602–610 (2009)
Chambers, N., Jurafsky, D.: Unsupervised learning of narrative event chains. In: Proceedings of ACL, pp. 789–797 (2008)
Cohen, R.: A computational theory of the function of clue words in argument understanding. In: Proceedings of COLING, pp. 251–255 (1984)
Copestake, A.: Slacker semantics: why superficiality, dependency and avoidance of commitment can be the right way to go. In: Proceedings of EACL, pp. 1–9 (2009)
DeJong, G.F.: An overview of the FRUMP system. In: Lehner, W.G., Ringle, M.H. (eds.) Strategies for Natural Language Processing, chap. 5. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1982)
Dorr, B.J., Zajic, D., Schwartz, R.: Hedge: a parse-and-trim approach to headline generation. In: Proceedings of the HLT Text Summarization Workshop, pp. 1–8 (2003)
Elson, D.K., McKeown, K.: Extending and evaluating a platform for story understanding. In: AAAI Spring Symposium: Intelligent Narrative Technologies II, pp. 32–35 (2009)
Erkan, G., Radev, D.R.: Lexrank: graph-based lexical centrality as salience in text summarization. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 22, 457–479 (2004)
Fang, Y., Teufel, S.: A summariser based on human memory limitations and lexical competition. In: Proceedings of EACL, pp. 732–741 (2014)
Farrow, E., Dickinson, T., Aylett, M.P.: Generating narratives from personal digital data: using sentiment, themes, and named entities to construct stories. In: Abascal, J., Barbosa, S., Fetter, M., Gross, T., Palanque, P., Winckler, M. (eds.) INTERACT 2015. LNCS, vol. 9299, pp. 473–477. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22723-8_41
Galley, M., McKeown, K., Fosler-Lussier, E., Jing, H.: Discourse segmentation of multi-party conversation. In: Proceedings of ACL, pp. 562–569 (2003)
Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., Airasian, P.W.: Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application. Merrill, Columbus (1976)
Goldberg, A.B., Fillmore, N., Andrzejewski, D., Xu, Z., Gibson, B., Zhu, X.: May all your wishes come true: a study of wishes and how to recognize them. In: Proceedings of HLT/NAACL, pp. 263–271 (2009)
Goyal, A., Riloff, E., Daume III, H.: A computational model for plot units. Computational Intelligence 29(3), 466–488 (2013)
Hahn, U., Reimer, U.: Computing text constituency: an algorithmic approach to the generation of text graphs. In: Proceedings of SIGIR, pp. 343–368 (1984)
van Halteren, H., Teufel, S.: Examining the consensus between human summaries: initial experiments with factoid analysis. In: Proceedings of the HLT Text Summarization Workshop (2003)
Kasch, N., Oates, T.: Mining script-like structures from the web. In: Proceedings of the NAACL HLT 2010 First International Workshop on Formalisms and Methodology for Learning by Reading, pp. 34–42 (2010)
Kintsch, W., van Dijk, T.A.: Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychol. Rev. 85(5), 363–394 (1978)
Knight, K., Marcu, D.: Statistics-based summarization – step one: sentence compression. In: Proceeding of AAAI-2000, pp. 703–710 (2000)
Landauer, T.K., Dumais, S.T.: A solution to Plato’s problem: the latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychol. Rev. 104(2), 211 (1997)
Lave, J.: Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1988)
Lee, H., Peirsman, Y., Chang, A., Chambers, N., Surdeanu, M., Jurafsky, D.: Stanford’s multi-pass sieve coreference resolution system at the CoNLL-2011 shared task. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning: Shared Task, pp. 28–34 (2011)
Lehnert, W.G.: Plot units: a narrative summarisation strategy. In: Lehnert, W.G., Ringle, M.H. (eds.) Strategies for Natural Language Processing, chap. 4, pp. 223–244. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1981a)
Lehnert, W.G.: Plot units and narrative summarization. Cogn. Sci. 4, 293–331 (1981)
Lehnert, W.G., Dyer, M.G., Johnson, P.N., Yang, C., Harley, S.: BORISan experiment in in-depth understanding of narratives. Artif. Intell. 20(1), 15–62 (1983)
Lin, D.: Using collocation statistics in information extraction. In: Proceedings of ACL/COLING 1998, Montreal, Canada (1998)
Lin, C.Y.: Rouge: a package for automatic evaluation of summaries. In: Proceedings of Workshop “Text Summarization Branches Out” at ACL 2004 (2004)
Luhn, H.P.: The automatic creation of literature abstracts. IBM J. Res. Dev. 2(2), 159–165 (1958)
McKeown, K., Robin, J., Kukich, K.: Generating concise natural language summaries. Inf. Process. Manag. 31(5), 703–733 (1995)
Mihalcea, R., Tarau, P.: Textrank: bringing order into texts. In: Proceedings of EMNLP (2004)
Mikolov, T., Chen, K., Corrado, G., Dean, J.: Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781 (2013)
Moens, M.F., Angheluta, R., De Busser, R.: Summarization of texts found on the world wide web. In: Abramowicz, W. (ed.) Knowledge-Based Information Retrieval and Filtering from the Web, vol. 746, pp. 101–120. Springer, Boston (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3739-4_5
Nenkova, A., Passonneau, R.J.: Evaluating content selection in summarization: the pyramid method. In: Proceedings of NAACL/HLT 2004, Boston, MA (2004)
Nishikawa, H., Arita, K., Tanaka, K., Hirao, T., Makino, T., Matsuo, Y.: Learning to generate coherent summary with discriminative hidden semi-Markov model. In: Proceedings of COLING, pp. 1648–1659 (2014)
Paivio, A.: Mental Representations. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1990)
Pustejovsky, J., Castano, J.M., Ingria, R., Sauri, R., Gaizauskas, R.J., Setzer, A., Katz, G., Radev, D.R.: TimeML: robust specification of event and temporal expressions in text. In: New Directions in Question Answering, vol. 3, pp. 28–34 (2003)
Radev, D., Allison, T., Blair-Goldensohn, S., Blitzer, J., Celebi, A., Dimitrov, S., Drabek, E., Hakim, A., Lam, W., Liu, D., et al.: MEAD - a platform for multidocument multilingual text summarization. In: Proceedings of LREC (2004)
Radev, D.R., McKeown, K.R.: Generating natural language summaries from multiple on-line sources. Comput. Linguist. 24(3), 469–500 (1998)
Reiter, E., Sripada, S., Hunter, J., Yu, J., Davy, I.: Choosing words in computer-generated weather forecasts. Artif. Intell. 167(1), 137–169 (2005)
Rumelhart, D.E.: Understanding and summarizing brief stories. In: Laberge, D., Samuels, S. (eds.) Basic Processes in Reading, Perception and Comprehension. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1977)
Saurí, R., Littman, J., Gaizauskas, R., Setzer, A., Pustejovsky, J.: TimeML Annotation Guidelines, Version 1.2.1 (2006)
Schank, R.C.: Conceptual Information Processing. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1975)
Schank, R.C., Abelson, R.P.: Scripts, Goals, Plans and Understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1977)
Stanovsky, G., Ficler, J., Dagan, I., Goldberg, Y.: Intermediary semantic representation through proposition structures. In: Proceedings of ACL, p. 66 (2014)
Steyvers, M., Griffiths, T.: Probabilistic topic models. In: Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis, vol. 427, no. 7, pp. 424–440 (2007)
Takamura, H., Inui, T., Okumura, M.: Extracting semantic orientations of phrases from dictionary. In: Proceedings of HLT-NAACL, vol. 2007, pp. 292–299 (2007)
Unno, Y., Ninomiya, T., Miyao, Y., Tsujii, J.: Trimming CFG parse trees for sentence compression using machine learning approaches. In: Proceedings of COLING/ACL, pp. 850–857 (2006)
Uyttendaele, C., Moens, M.F., Dumortier, J.: Salomon: automatic abstracting of legal cases for effective access to court decisions. Artif. Intell. Law 6(1), 59–79 (1998)
Weischedel, R., Consortium, L.D., et al.: OntoNotes Release 4.0. Linguistic Data Consortium (2011)
Wierzbicka, A.: English Speech Act Verbs: A Semantic Dictionary. Academic Press, Cambridge (1987)
Wilson, T., Hoffmann, P., Somasundaran, S., Kessler, J., Wiebe, J., Choi, Y., Cardie, C., Riloff, E., Patwardhan, S.: OpinionFinder: a system for subjectivity analysis. In: Proceedings of HLT/EMNLP, pp. 34–35 (2005)
Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., Hoffmann, P.: Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of the Conference on HLT and EMNLP, pp. 347–354 (2005b)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Teufel, S. (2018). Deeper Summarisation: The Second Time Around. In: Gelbukh, A. (eds) Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing. CICLing 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9624. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75487-1_44
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75487-1_44
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-75486-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-75487-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)