Extractive Summarization of Broadcast News: Comparing Strategies for European Portuguese: Difference between revisions
From HLT@INESC-ID
m (Computational Discourse Analysis moved to ComExtractive Summarization of Broadcast News: Comparing Strategies for European Portuguese) |
No edit summary |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
== Date == | == Date == | ||
* 15:00, September 14, | * 15:00, September 14, 2007 | ||
* 3rd floor meeting room | * 3rd floor meeting room | ||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
== Abstract == | == Abstract == | ||
This work compares three methods for extractive summarization of Portuguese broadcast news: feature-based, Maximal Marginal Relevance, and Latent Semantic Analysis. The main goal is to understand the level of agreement among the automatic summaries and how they compare to summaries produced by non-professional human summarizers. Results were evaluated using the ROUGE-L metric. Maximal Marginal Relevance performed close to human summarizers. Both feature-based and Latent Semantic Analysis automatic summarizers performed close to each other and worse than Maximal Marginal Relevance, when compared to the summaries done by the human summarizers. | |||
[[category:Seminars]] | [[category:Seminars]] | ||
[[category:Seminars 2007]] | [[category:Seminars 2007]] |
Latest revision as of 09:23, 21 September 2007
Date
- 15:00, September 14, 2007
- 3rd floor meeting room
Speaker
Abstract
This work compares three methods for extractive summarization of Portuguese broadcast news: feature-based, Maximal Marginal Relevance, and Latent Semantic Analysis. The main goal is to understand the level of agreement among the automatic summaries and how they compare to summaries produced by non-professional human summarizers. Results were evaluated using the ROUGE-L metric. Maximal Marginal Relevance performed close to human summarizers. Both feature-based and Latent Semantic Analysis automatic summarizers performed close to each other and worse than Maximal Marginal Relevance, when compared to the summaries done by the human summarizers.