Here’s an easy-to-understand explanation of the Text Summarization Techniques
paper:
Text Summarization Techniques: A Brief Survey
1. What is the paper about?
This paper reviews different methods used for text summarization, which is the
process of shortening a large piece of text while keeping the important information.
The paper focuses on two main methods:
Extractive Summarization: This method selects sentences directly from the original text and
combines them to create a summary.
Abstractive Summarization: This method generates new sentences based on the meaning of
the text, rather than directly copying parts of it.
2. Key Techniques Discussed:
Extractive Methods:
o These methods pick important sentences from the original text and use them to
create the summary. A common approach is TextRank, which is based on graphs to
identify the most important sentences.
Abstractive Methods:
o Instead of copying sentences, these methods generate new sentences that
summarize the text. For example, the T5 model (mentioned earlier) can read a
passage and then create a summary by generating new sentences, making the
summary more natural and coherent.
3. Datasets Mentioned:
The paper doesn’t focus on a single dataset, but it mentions CNN/DailyMail and DUC as
popular datasets used for summarization research.
4. Performance Metrics:
The paper discusses ROUGE score as the key metric for evaluating text
summarization models.
ROUGE is a measure of how well the model's generated summary matches a reference
summary. It checks things like how many words or phrases overlap between the two
summaries. A higher ROUGE score means better performance.
5. Comparison:
Extractive Methods (like TextRank) are simpler, but they often don’t do
well in creating summaries that flow naturally or seem human-like. These
methods are limited in their ability to generalize.
Abstractive Methods (like BART and T5) are much more advanced. These
models generate new sentences and can create more coherent, natural
summaries. They are considered state-of-the-art because they handle modern
summarization tasks better than extractive methods.
Summary Table for All Papers
Here’s a brief overview of the papers and their main technologies, datasets, and
performance:
State-of-
Paper Techthe-Art Dataset Performance
Tech
STT Transformer Best WER,
OpenAI's
Whisper (Speech-to- , noise robust,
680K hours
Text) multilingual multilingual
Best on GLUE,
Summarizati Text-to-Text C4 (web
T5 ROUGE,
on Transformer corpus)
CNN/DM
Wikipedia, 97% of BERT's
Distilled
DistilBERT QA, NLP BookCorpu performance,
BERT
s 60% faster
Speed,
FFMPEG User
MoviePy Video Tools supports many
Backend Videos
video formats
CNNs,
MS COCO, Reviews of
RNNs,
DL Survey Survey YouTube- accuracy,
Transformer
8M latency
s
Text Extractive ROUGE score
CNN/DM,
Summarizati Survey vs. for
DUC
on Survey Abstractive summarization
In short:
The paper compares extractive and abstractive summarization methods. Extractive
methods are simple but can be less natural, while abstractive methods like T5 are
more advanced and generate better, more coherent summaries. ROUGE score is used
to measure how good these summaries are.
