This benchmark evaluates a model's ability to generate personalized news headlines by accurately capturing user interests from implicit feedback (clicks and dwell times) while filtering out noise. It probes the system's capacity to align generated text with both lexical patterns and semantic meaning relative to ground-truth headlines tailored to specific user preferences. Use when the user wants to benchmark on DT-PENS, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports ROUGE-1.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill dt-pens-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Dt Pens Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-dt-pens-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: dt-pens-eval
description: This benchmark evaluates a model's ability to generate personalized news headlines by accurately capturing user interests from implicit feedback (clicks and dwell times) while filtering out noise. It probes the system's capacity to align generated text with both lexical patterns and semantic meaning relative to ground-truth headlines tailored to specific user preferences. Use when the user wants to benchmark on DT-PENS, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports ROUGE-1.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2508.07178
bibtex_key: liu2025improvedpersonalized
confidence: high
---
# dt-pens-eval
> Improved Personalized Headline Generation via Denoising Fake Interests from Implicit Feedback — Liu et al. (2025) (arXiv:2508.07178, 2025)
## What this evaluates
This benchmark evaluates a model's ability to generate personalized news headlines by accurately capturing user interests from implicit feedback (clicks and dwell times) while filtering out noise. It probes the system's capacity to align generated text with both lexical patterns and semantic meaning relative to ground-truth headlines tailored to specific user preferences.
## Datasets
- **DT-PENS** — total 9823; splits: test (9823); repo https://github.com/liukejin-up/PHG-DIF
## Metrics
- `ROUGE-1` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Measures unigram overlap between generated and reference headlines.
- `ROUGE-2` — range: percent
- Measures bigram overlap between generated and reference headlines.
- `ROUGE-L` — range: percent
- Measures longest common subsequence overlap between generated and reference headlines.
- `BLEURT` — range: [0, 100]
- Uses a BERT-based model to capture semantic similarity and provide robust quality judgments.
- `BARTScore` — range: [0, 100]
- Assesses fluency, grammar, and alignment with input text by leveraging BART’s generation probabilities.
## Input / output format
**Input**: User click history, dwell times, and candidate news article content/body.
**Output**: A single personalized news headline.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(predictions, references):
rouge1 = rouge_score(references, predictions, ngrams=1)
rouge2 = rouge_score(references, predictions, ngrams=2)
rougeL = rouge_score(references, predictions, ngrams='L')
bleurt = bleurt_score(references, predictions, model='bleurt')
bart = bart_score(references, predictions, model='bart')
return {'ROUGE-1': rouge1, 'ROUGE-2': rouge2, 'ROUGE-L': rougeL, 'BLEURT': bleurt, 'BARTScore': bart}
```
## Common pitfalls
- The dataset was constructed using LLMs and human filtering, so evaluators must not use the same LLMs for generation during testing to avoid data leakage or style overfitting.
- Dwell-time annotations are only available for the dataset construction phase; the evaluation itself relies on standard text generation metrics, so models cannot directly optimize against dwell time during inference.
- Baselines include both non-personalized (BART, T5) and personalized methods; comparing personalized models against non-personalized ones without accounting for the lack of user history will unfairly penalize the latter.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> For lexical similarity between the generated and reference headlines, we employ ROUGE-n*(Lin, [2004])*, which measures the overlap of n-grams and is widely used in text summarization evaluation. To evaluate the semantic quality of the generated headlines, we utilize two model-based evaluation methods: BLEURT*(Sellam et al., [2020])* and BARTScore*(Yuan et al., [2021])*. BLEURT captures semantic similarity and provides robust quality judgments. BARTScore assesses fluency, grammar, and alignment with the input text by leveraging BART’s language understanding and generation probabilities.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{liu2025improvedpersonalized,
title={Improved Personalized Headline Generation via Denoising Fake Interests from Implicit Feedback},
author={Liu et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2508.07178}
}
```
- arXiv: 2508.07178
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!