Papers › Jointly Measuring Diversity and Quality in Text Generation Models

Jointly Measuring Diversity and Quality in Text Generation Models

8 Apr 2019NAACL 2019 6arXiv:1904.03971archive 2025-07-28

Ehsan Montahaei, Danial Alihosseini, Mahdieh Soleymani Baghshah

Text generation is an important Natural Language Processing task with various applications. Although several metrics have already been introduced to evaluate the text generation methods, each of them has its own shortcomings. The most widely used metrics such as BLEU only consider the quality of generated sentences and neglect their diversity. For example, repeatedly generation of only one high quality sentence would result in a high BLEU score. On the other hand, the more recent metric introduced to evaluate the diversity of generated texts known as Self-BLEU ignores the quality of generated texts. In this paper, we propose metrics to evaluate both the quality and diversity simultaneously by approximating the distance of the learned generative model and the real data distribution. For this purpose, we first introduce a metric that approximates this distance using n-gram based measures. Then, a feature-based measure which is based on a recent highly deep model trained on a large text corpus called BERT is introduced. Finally, for oracle training mode in which the generator's density can also be calculated, we propose to use the distance measures between the corresponding explicit distributions. Eventually, the most popular and recent text generation models are evaluated using both the existing and the proposed metrics and the preferences of the proposed metrics are determined.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

6 samples harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 5 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 1 of the 6 samples is pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections