Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40144005›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing2024

APPLS: Evaluating Evaluation Metrics for Plain Language Summarization.

Yue Guo, Tal August, Gondy Leroy, Trevor Cohen, Lucy Lu Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Explainable AI for Clinical Outcome Prediction: A Survey of Clinician Perceptions and Preferences.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yue GuoUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
Tal AugustUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
Gondy LeroyUniversity of Arizona.
Trevor CohenUniversity of Washington.
Lucy Lu WangUniversity of Washington.

Funding

Professional to Plain Language Neural Translation: A Path Toward Actionable Health InformationR21LM013934 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI COHEN, TREVOR · 2022 to 2023
$402k
NLM NIH HHS R21 LM013934
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While there has been significant development of models for Plain Language Summarization (PLS), evaluation remains a challenge. PLS lacks a dedicated assessment metric, and the suitability of text generation evaluation metrics is unclear due to the unique transformations involved (e.g., adding background explanations, removing jargon). To address these questions, our study introduces a granular meta-evaluation testbed, APPLS, designed to evaluate metrics for PLS. We identify four PLS criteria from previous work-informativeness, simplification, coherence, and faithfulness-and define a set of perturbations corresponding to these criteria that sensitive metrics should be able to detect. We apply these perturbations to the texts of two PLS datasets to create our testbed. Using APPLS, we assess performance of 14 metrics, including automated scores, lexical features, and LLM prompt-based evaluations. Our analysis reveals that while some current metrics show sensitivity to specific criteria, no single method captures all four criteria simultaneously. We therefore recommend a suite of automated metrics be used to capture PLS quality along all relevant criteria. This work contributes the first meta-evaluation testbed for PLS and a comprehensive evaluation of existing metrics.

Identifiers

PMID40144005
PMCPMC11938995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.