ChatGPT as a Factual Inconsistency Evaluator for Abstractive Text Summarization

The performance of abstractive text summarization has been greatly boosted by pre-trained language models recently. The main concern of existing abstractive summarization methods is the factual inconsistency problem of their generated summary. To alleviate the problem, many efforts have focused on developing effective factuality evaluation metrics based on natural language inference and question answering et al. However, they have limitations of high computational complexity and relying on annotated data. Most recently, large language models such as ChatGPT have shown strong ability in not only natural language understanding but also natural language inference. In this paper, we study the factual inconsistency evaluation ability of ChatGPT under the zero-shot setting by evaluating it on the coarse-grained and fine-grained factuality evaluation tasks including binary natural language inference (NLI), summary ranking, and consistency rating. Experimental results show that ChatGPT outperforms previous SOTA evaluation metrics on 6/9 datasets across three tasks, demonstrating its great potential for assessing factual inconsistency in the zero-shot setting. The results also highlight the importance of prompt design and the need for future efforts to address ChatGPT's limitations on evaluation bias, wrong reasoning, and hallucination.Comment: ongoing work, 12 pages, 4 figure

The Factual Inconsistency Problem in Abstractive Text Summarization: A Survey

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.Comment: 9 pages, 5 figure