Papers › Reducing Quantity Hallucinations in Abstractive Summarization

Reducing Quantity Hallucinations in Abstractive Summarization

28 Sep 2020Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics 2020arXiv:2009.13312archive 2025-07-28

Zheng Zhao, Shay B. Cohen, Bonnie Webber

It is well-known that abstractive summaries are subject to hallucination---including material that is not supported by the original text. While summaries can be made hallucination-free by limiting them to general phrases, such summaries would fail to be very informative. Alternatively, one can try to avoid hallucinations by verifying that any specific entities in the summary appear in the original text in a similar context. This is the approach taken by our system, Herman. The system learns to recognize and verify quantity entities (dates, numbers, sums of money, etc.) in a beam-worth of abstractive summaries produced by state-of-the-art models, in order to up-rank those summaries whose quantity terms are supported by the original text. Experimental results demonstrate that the ROUGE scores of such up-ranked summaries have a higher Precision than summaries that have not been up-ranked, without a comparable loss in Recall, resulting in higher F₁. Preliminary human evaluation of up-ranked vs. original summaries shows people's preference for the former.

PaperPDFConference PDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

zsquaredz/Herman officialpytorch report

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

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Abstractive Text SummarizationHallucination

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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