Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

The Factual Inconsistency Problem in Abstractive Text Summarization: A Survey

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2104.14839 v3 pith:V5JJFL3Z submitted 2021-04-30 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords textfactualsummariessummarizationevaluationinconsistencymodelsneural
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recently, various neural encoder-decoder models pioneered by Seq2Seq framework have been proposed to achieve the goal of generating more abstractive summaries by learning to map input text to output text. At a high level, such neural models can freely generate summaries without any constraint on the words or phrases used. Moreover, their format is closer to human-edited summaries and output is more readable and fluent. However, the neural model's abstraction ability is a double-edged sword. A commonly observed problem with the generated summaries is the distortion or fabrication of factual information in the article. This inconsistency between the original text and the summary has caused various concerns over its applicability, and the previous evaluation methods of text summarization are not suitable for this issue. In response to the above problems, the current research direction is predominantly divided into two categories, one is to design fact-aware evaluation metrics to select outputs without factual inconsistency errors, and the other is to develop new summarization systems towards factual consistency. In this survey, we focus on presenting a comprehensive review of these fact-specific evaluation methods and text summarization models.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 67 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. Spatial Visual Analytics for Multi-Document Summary Verification

    cs.HC 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Placing source documents by how they align with summary sentences improves people's ability to verify multi-document AI summaries, outperforming a linear list.

  2. The Cost of Knowing: A Resource-Aware Protocol for Benchmarking Hallucination Beyond Static Leaderboards

    cs.AI 2026-07 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    MAS-HQ defines a resource-aware Q-Score and shows that the system with the highest raw factuality is often not the winner once normalized cost is subtracted.

Pith tools