Assessing the quality of summarizers poses significant challenges—gold summaries are hard to obtain and their suitability depends on the use context of the summarization system. Who is the user of the system, and what do they intend to do with the summary? In response, we propose a novel task-oriented evaluation approach that assesses summarizers based on their capacity to produce summaries while preserving task outcomes. We theoretically establish both a lower and upper bound on the expected error rate of these tasks, which depends on the mutual information between source texts and generated summaries. We introduce COSMIC, a practical implementation of this metric, and demonstrate its strong correlation with human judgment-based metrics, as well as its effectiveness in predicting downstream task performance. Comparative analyses against established metrics like BERTScore and ROUGE highlight the competitive performance of COSMIC.

Scientific peer review is essential for the quality of academic publications. However, the increasing number of paper submissions to conferences has strained the reviewing process. This surge poses a burden on area chairs who have to carefully read an ever-growing volume of reviews and discern each reviewer’s main arguments as part of their decision process. In this paper, we introduce , a summarization method designed to offer a concise yet comprehensive overview of scholarly reviews. Unlike traditional consensus-based methods, extracts both common and unique opinions from the reviews. We introduce novel uniqueness scores based on the Rational Speech Act framework to identify relevant sentences in the reviews. Our method aims to provide a pragmatic glimpse into all reviews, offering a balanced perspective on their opinions. Our experimental results with both automatic metrics and human evaluation show that generates more discriminative summaries than baseline methods in terms of human evaluation while achieving comparable performance with these methods in terms of automatic metrics.

Implementing effective control mechanisms to ensure the proper functioning and security of deployed NLP models, from translation to chatbots, is essential. A key ingredient to ensure safe system behaviour is Out-Of-Distribution (OOD) detection, which aims to detect whether an input sample is statistically far from the training distribution. Although OOD detection is a widely covered topic in classification tasks, most methods rely on hidden features output by the encoder. In this work, we focus on leveraging soft-probabilities in a black-box framework, i.e. we can access the soft-predictions but not the internal states of the model. Our contributions include: (i) RAINPROOF a Relative informAItioN Projection OOD detection framework; and (ii) a more operational evaluation setting for OOD detection. Surprisingly, we find that OOD detection is not necessarily aligned with task-specific measures. The OOD detector may filter out samples well processed by the model and keep samples that are not, leading to weaker performance. Our results show that RAINPROOF provides OOD detection methods more aligned with task-specific performance metrics than traditional OOD detectors.