Papers › Prompted Opinion Summarization with GPT-3.5

Prompted Opinion Summarization with GPT-3.5

29 Nov 2022arXiv:2211.15914archive 2025-07-28

Adithya Bhaskar, Alexander R. Fabbri, Greg Durrett

Large language models have shown impressive performance across a wide variety of tasks, including text summarization. In this paper, we show that this strong performance extends to opinion summarization. We explore several pipeline methods for applying GPT-3.5 to summarize a large collection of user reviews in a prompted fashion. To handle arbitrarily large numbers of user reviews, we explore recursive summarization as well as methods for selecting salient content to summarize through supervised clustering or extraction. On two datasets, an aspect-oriented summarization dataset of hotel reviews (SPACE) and a generic summarization dataset of Amazon and Yelp reviews (FewSum), we show that GPT-3.5 models achieve very strong performance in human evaluation. We argue that standard evaluation metrics do not reflect this, and introduce three new metrics targeting faithfulness, factuality, and genericity to contrast these different methods.

PaperPDFCode

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

Code

testzer0/zs-summ-gpt3 officialmentioned in paper 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

Opinion SummarizationText Summarization

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

AdamAttentionAttention DropoutBPECosine AnnealingDense ConnectionsDropoutGPT-3Layer NormalizationLinear LayerLinear Warmup With Cosine AnnealingMulti-Head AttentionResidual ConnectionSoftmaxWeight Decay

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