Online argumentative dialog is a rich source of information on popular beliefs and opinions that could be useful to companies as well as governmental or public policy agencies. Compact, easy to read, summaries of these dialogues would thus be highly valuable. A priori, it is not even clear what form such a summary should take. Previous work on summarization has primarily focused on summarizing written texts, where the notion of an abstract of the text is well defined. We collect gold standard training data consisting of five human summaries for each of 161 dialogues on the topics of Gay Marriage, Gun Control and Abortion. We present several different computational models aimed at identifying segments of the dialogues whose content should be used for the summary, using linguistic features and Word2vec features with both SVMs and Bidirectional LSTMs. We show that we can identify the most important arguments by using the dialog context with a best F-measure of 0.74 for gun control, 0.71 for gay marriage, and 0.67 for abortion.
  This paper presents a method for combining query-relevance with information-novelty in the context of text retrieval and summarization. The Maximal Marginal Relevance (MMR) criterion strives to reduce redundancy while maintaining query relevance in re-ranking retrieved documents and in selecting apprw priate passages for text summarization. Preliminary results indicate some benefits for MMR diversity ranking in document retrieval and in single document summarization. The latter are borne out by the recent results of the SUMMAC conference in the evaluation of summarization systems. However, the clearest advantage is demonstrated in constructing non-redundant multi-document summaries, where MMR results are clearly superior to non-MMR passage selection. In this paper, the authors introduce TextRank, a graph-based ranking model for text processing, and show how this model can be successfully used in natural language applications. We design a class of submodular functions meant for document summarization tasks. These functions each combine two terms, one which encourages the summary to be representative of the corpus, and the other which positively rewards diversity. Critically, our functions are monotone nondecreasing and submodular, which means that an efficient scalable greedy optimization scheme has a constant factor guarantee of optimality. When evaluated on DUC 2004-2007 corpora, we obtain better than existing state-of-art results in both generic and query-focused document summarization. Lastly, we show that several well-established methods for document summarization correspond, in fact, to submodular function optimization, adding further evidence that submodular functions are a natural fit for document summarization. In this work we study the theoretical and empirical properties of various global inference algorithms for multi-document summarization. We start by defining a general framework for inference in summarization. We then present three algorithms: The first is a greedy approximate method, the second a dynamic programming approach based on solutions to the knapsack problem, and the third is an exact algorithm that uses an Integer Linear Programming formulation of the problem. We empirically evaluate all three algorithms and show that, relative to the exact solution, the dynamic programming algorithm provides near optimal results with preferable scaling properties.