Cargando…

Evaluating the use of different positional strategies for sentence selection in biomedical literature summarization

BACKGROUND: The position of a sentence in a document has been traditionally considered an indicator of the relevance of the sentence, and therefore it is frequently used by automatic summarization systems as an attribute for sentence selection. Sentences close to the beginning of the document are su...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Plaza, Laura, Carrillo-de-Albornoz, Jorge
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3648362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23445074
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-14-71
_version_ 1782268826495221760
author Plaza, Laura
Carrillo-de-Albornoz, Jorge
author_facet Plaza, Laura
Carrillo-de-Albornoz, Jorge
author_sort Plaza, Laura
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The position of a sentence in a document has been traditionally considered an indicator of the relevance of the sentence, and therefore it is frequently used by automatic summarization systems as an attribute for sentence selection. Sentences close to the beginning of the document are supposed to deal with the main topic and thus are selected for the summary. This criterion has shown to be very effective when summarizing some types of documents, such as news items. However, this property is not likely to be found in other types of documents, such as scientific articles, where other positional criteria may be preferred. The purpose of the present work is to study the utility of different positional strategies for biomedical literature summarization. RESULTS: We have evaluated three different positional strategies: (1) awarding the sentences at the beginning of the document, (2) preferring those at the beginning and end of the document, and (3) weighting the sentences according to the section in which they appear. To this end, we have implemented two summarizers, one based on semantic graphs and the other based on concept frequencies, and evaluated the summaries they produce when combined with each of the positional strategies above using ROUGE metrics. Our results indicate that it is possible to improve the quality of the summaries by weighting the sentences according to the section in which they appear (≈17% improvement in ROUGE-2 for the graph-based summarizer and ≈20% for the frequency-based summarizer), and that the sections containing the more salient information are the Methods and Material and the Discussion and Results ones. CONCLUSIONS: It has been found that the use of traditional positional criteria that award sentences at the beginning and/or the end of the document are not helpful when summarizing scientific literature. In contrast, a more appropriate strategy is that which weights sentences according to the section in which they appear.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3648362
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36483622013-05-10 Evaluating the use of different positional strategies for sentence selection in biomedical literature summarization Plaza, Laura Carrillo-de-Albornoz, Jorge BMC Bioinformatics Research Article BACKGROUND: The position of a sentence in a document has been traditionally considered an indicator of the relevance of the sentence, and therefore it is frequently used by automatic summarization systems as an attribute for sentence selection. Sentences close to the beginning of the document are supposed to deal with the main topic and thus are selected for the summary. This criterion has shown to be very effective when summarizing some types of documents, such as news items. However, this property is not likely to be found in other types of documents, such as scientific articles, where other positional criteria may be preferred. The purpose of the present work is to study the utility of different positional strategies for biomedical literature summarization. RESULTS: We have evaluated three different positional strategies: (1) awarding the sentences at the beginning of the document, (2) preferring those at the beginning and end of the document, and (3) weighting the sentences according to the section in which they appear. To this end, we have implemented two summarizers, one based on semantic graphs and the other based on concept frequencies, and evaluated the summaries they produce when combined with each of the positional strategies above using ROUGE metrics. Our results indicate that it is possible to improve the quality of the summaries by weighting the sentences according to the section in which they appear (≈17% improvement in ROUGE-2 for the graph-based summarizer and ≈20% for the frequency-based summarizer), and that the sections containing the more salient information are the Methods and Material and the Discussion and Results ones. CONCLUSIONS: It has been found that the use of traditional positional criteria that award sentences at the beginning and/or the end of the document are not helpful when summarizing scientific literature. In contrast, a more appropriate strategy is that which weights sentences according to the section in which they appear. BioMed Central 2013-02-27 /pmc/articles/PMC3648362/ /pubmed/23445074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-14-71 Text en Copyright © 2013 Plaza and Carrillo-de-Albornoz; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Plaza, Laura
Carrillo-de-Albornoz, Jorge
Evaluating the use of different positional strategies for sentence selection in biomedical literature summarization
title Evaluating the use of different positional strategies for sentence selection in biomedical literature summarization
title_full Evaluating the use of different positional strategies for sentence selection in biomedical literature summarization
title_fullStr Evaluating the use of different positional strategies for sentence selection in biomedical literature summarization
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the use of different positional strategies for sentence selection in biomedical literature summarization
title_short Evaluating the use of different positional strategies for sentence selection in biomedical literature summarization
title_sort evaluating the use of different positional strategies for sentence selection in biomedical literature summarization
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3648362/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23445074
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-14-71
work_keys_str_mv AT plazalaura evaluatingtheuseofdifferentpositionalstrategiesforsentenceselectioninbiomedicalliteraturesummarization
AT carrillodealbornozjorge evaluatingtheuseofdifferentpositionalstrategiesforsentenceselectioninbiomedicalliteraturesummarization