Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 2020
DOI: 10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.125
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Self-Attention Guided Copy Mechanism for Abstractive Summarization

Abstract: Copy module has been widely equipped in the recent abstractive summarization models, which facilitates the decoder to extract words from the source into the summary. Generally, the encoder-decoder attention is served as the copy distribution, while how to guarantee that important words in the source are copied remains a challenge. In this work, we propose a Transformer-based model to enhance the copy mechanism. Specifically, we identify the importance of each source word based on the degree centrality with a d… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
41
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
(28 reference statements)
2
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We see similar kind of improvements as observed in Table 1, except for ROUGE-2 for ROBFAME which is 0.23 points worse than the ROBERTAS2S baseline. Our best model PEG-FAME performs better than both copy mechanism models: LSTM-based PtGen (See et al, 2017) and Transformer-based SAGCopy (Xu et al, 2020). PEGFAME performs worse when compared with T5 (Raffel et al, 2019), the original PEGASUS and ProphetNet (Qi et al, 2020).…”
Section: Bias In Datamentioning
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We see similar kind of improvements as observed in Table 1, except for ROUGE-2 for ROBFAME which is 0.23 points worse than the ROBERTAS2S baseline. Our best model PEG-FAME performs better than both copy mechanism models: LSTM-based PtGen (See et al, 2017) and Transformer-based SAGCopy (Xu et al, 2020). PEGFAME performs worse when compared with T5 (Raffel et al, 2019), the original PEGASUS and ProphetNet (Qi et al, 2020).…”
Section: Bias In Datamentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Cao et al (2017) force faithful generation by conditioning on both source text and extracted fact descriptions from the source text. Song et al (2020) propose to jointly generate a sentence and its syntactic dependency parse to induce grammaticality and faithfulness. Tian et al (2019) learn a confidence score to ensure that the model attends to the source whenever necessary.…”
Section: Topic-aware Generation Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous encoder-decoder models (Rush et al, 2015;Nallapati et al, 2016;Paulus et al, 2018;Chopra et al, 2016) equipped with the attention mechanism (Bahdanau et al, 2015) have achieved great performance on abstractive summarization. However, they were found to miss some important content in input documents (Li et al, 2018;Xu et al, 2020). How to retain the key information of input documents in the generated summaries has received increasing attention in the past few years.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gehrmann et al (2018) utilize the attention masks to restrict copying phrases from the selected parts of an input document. Xu et al (2020) explicitly guide the copy process with the centrality of each source word. Several papers also explore the potential of enhancing the encoder.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation