Pyramid annotation makes it possible to evaluate quantitatively and qualitatively the content of machine-generated (or human) summaries. Evaluation methods must prove themselves against the same measuring stick – evaluation – as other research methods. First, a formal assessment of pyramid data from the 2003 Document Understanding Conference (DUC) is presented; this addresses whether the form of annotation is reliable and whether score results are consistent across annotators. A combination of interannotator reliability measures of the two manual annotation phases (pyramid creation and annotation of system peer summaries against pyramid models), and significance tests of the similarity of system scores from distinct annotations, produces highly reliable results. The most rigorous test consists of a comparison of peer system rankings produced from two independent sets of pyramid and peer annotations, which produce essentially the same rankings. Three years of DUC data (2003, 2005, 2006) are used to assess the reliability of the method across distinct evaluation settings: distinct systems, document sets, summary lengths, and numbers of model summaries. This functional assessment addresses the method's ability to discriminate systems across years. Results indicate that the statistical power of the method is more than sufficient to identify statistically significant differences among systems, and that the statistical power varies little across the 3 years.

Electronic written texts used in computer-mediated interactions (emails, blogs, chats, and the like) contain significant deviations from the norm of the language. This paper presents the detail of a system aiming at normalizing the orthography of French SMS messages: after discussing the linguistic peculiarities of these messages and possible approaches to their automatic normalization, we present, compare, and evaluate various instanciations of a normalization device based on weighted finite-state transducers. These experiments show that using an intermediate phonemic representation and training, our system outperforms an alternative normalization system based on phrase-based statistical machine translation techniques.

Web-based discussion fora proliferate on the Internet. These fora consist of threads about specific matters. Existing forum search facilities provide an easy way for finding threads of interest. However, understanding the content of threads is not always trivial. This problem becomes more pressing as threads become longer. It frustrates users that are looking for specific information and also makes it more difficult to make valuable contributions to a discussion. We postulate that having a concise summary of a thread would greatly help forum users. But, how would we best create such summaries? In this paper, we present an automated method of summarising threads in discussion fora. Compared with summarisation of unstructured texts and spoken dialogues, the structural characteristics of threads give important advantages. We studied how to best exploit these characteristics. Messages in threads contain both explicit and implicit references to each other and are structured. Therefore, we term the threads hierarchical dialogues. Our proposed summarisation algorithm produces one summary of an hierarchical dialogue by ‘cherry-picking’ sentences out of the original messages that make up a thread. We try to select sentences usable for obtaining an overview of the discussion. Our method is built around a set of heuristics based on observations of real fora discussions. The data used for this research was in Dutch, but the developed method equally applies to other languages. We evaluated our approach using a prototype. Users judged our summariser as very useful, half of them indicating they would use it regularly or always when visiting fora.