Multi-answer-focused multi-document summarization using a question-answering engine

ACM Transactions on Asian Language Information Processing

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 305-320

  Mori, Tatsunori ^a   Nozawa, Masanori ^a   Asada, Yoshiaki ^a  

^a YOKOHAMA NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Information gain ratio; Maximal marginal relevance; Question answering engine

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION GAIN RATIO; MAXIMAL MARGINAL RELEVANCE; QUESTION-ANSWERING ENGINE; SUMMARIZATION;

COMPUTER SYSTEMS; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; INTEGRATION; SEARCH ENGINES;

INFORMATION ANALYSIS;

EID: 33745175509     PISSN: 15300226     EISSN: 15300226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1111667.1111672     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. BERGER, A. AND MITTAL, V. O. 2000. Query-relevant summarization using FAQs. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-2000). 294-301.
2. CARBONELL, J. AND GOLDSTEIN, J. 1998. The use of MMR, diversity-based reranking for reordering documents and producing summaries. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual International ACM-SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 335-336.
3. FUKUSIMA, T. AND OKUMURA, M. 2001. Text summarization challenge text summarization evaluation in Japan (TSC). In Proceedings of the NAACL 2001 Workshop on Automatic Summarization.
4. GAIZAUSKAS, R. 2003. Cubreporter web page, http://nlp.shef.ac.uk/ cubreporter/index.html.
5. HIRAO, T., SASAKI, Y., AND ISOZAKI, H. 2001. An extrinsic evaluation for question-biased text summarization on qa tasks. In Proceedings of the NAACL 2001 workshop on Automatic Summarization. 61-68.
6. HIRAO, T., OKUMURA, M., FUKUSHIMA, T., AND NANBA, H. 2004. Text summarization challenge 3-Text summarization evaluation at NTCIR Workshop 4 -. In Working Notes of the Fourth NTCIR Workshop Meeting. 407-411.
7. MORI, T. 2002. Information gain ratio as term weight-the case of summarization of ir results -. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 02), 688-694.
8. MORI, T., OHTA, T., FUJIHATA, K., AND KUMON, R. 2003. An A* search in sentential matching for question answering. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems E86-D, 9 (Sept.), 1658-1668. Special Issue on Text Processing for Information Access.
9. NENKOVA, A., SCHIFFMAN, B., SCHLAIKER, A., BLAIR-GOLDENSOHN, S., BARZILAY, R., SIGELMAN, S., HATZIVASSILOGLOU, V., AND MCKEOWN, K. 2003. Columbia at the Document Understanding Conference 2003. In Proceedings of Document Understanding Conference 2003.
10. NOBATA, C. AND SEKINE, S. 2003. Results of CRL/NYU system at DUC-2003 and an experiment on division of document sets. In Proceedings of Document Understanding Conference 2003.
11. OKUMURA, M. AND MOCHIZUKI, H. 2000. Query-biased summarization based on lexical chaining. Computational Intelligence 16, 4, 578-585.
12. OVER, P. AND YEN, J. 2003. An introduction to DUC 2003: Intrinsic evaluation of generic news text summarization systems. In Proceedings of Document Understanding Conference 2003.
13. TOMBROS, A. AND SANDERSON, M. 1998. Advantages of query biased summaries in information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual International ACM-SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 2-10.
14. WU, H., RADEV, D. R., AND FAN, W. 2002. Towards answer focused summarization. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Information Technology and Applications.