Evaluates the quality of abstractive summaries for long scientific documents by measuring n-gram overlap between generated text and reference abstracts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on arXiv, PubMed, 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 long-doc-rouge-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Long Doc Rouge Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-long-doc-rouge-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: long-doc-rouge-eval
description: Evaluates the quality of abstractive summaries for long scientific documents by measuring n-gram overlap between generated text and reference abstracts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on arXiv, PubMed, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports ROUGE-1.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 1804.05685
bibtex_key: cohan2018discourse
confidence: high
---
# long-doc-rouge-eval
> A Discourse-Aware Attention Model for Abstractive Summarization of Long Documents — Cohan et al. (2018) (arXiv:1804.05685, 2018)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the quality of abstractive summaries for long scientific documents by measuring n-gram overlap between generated text and reference abstracts.
## Datasets
- **arXiv** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **PubMed** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `ROUGE-1` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Full-length F-1 score based on unigram overlap between generated summary and reference abstract. Tokens are lowercased and tokenized using spaCy.
- `ROUGE-2` — range: percent
- Full-length F-1 score based on bigram overlap, computed with the same lowercased spaCy tokenization.
- `ROUGE-3` — range: percent
- Full-length F-1 score based on trigram overlap, computed with the same lowercased spaCy tokenization.
- `ROUGE-L` — range: percent
- Full-length F-1 score based on the longest common subsequence between generated and reference summaries, computed with the same lowercased spaCy tokenization.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Long scientific documents (arXiv/PubMed papers), truncated to 2000 tokens per document, 500 tokens per section, max 4 sections.
**Output**: Abstractive summary (abstract), generated via beam search with beam size 4, max length 210 tokens.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_rouge_f1(generated, reference):
# 1. Lowercase both strings
gen = generated.lower()
ref = reference.lower()
# 2. Tokenize using spaCy (sentence and word level)
gen_tokens = [token.text for token in nlp(gen)]
ref_tokens = [token.text for token in nlp(ref)]
# 3. Compute full-length F-1 score for specified ROUGE variant
score = rouge_score(ref, gen, use_stemmer=False)
return score['rouge1'].fmeasure * 100 # Return as percent
```
## Common pitfalls
- ROUGE tokenization differs across implementations; this paper explicitly uses spaCy for both sentence and word tokenization, unlike the standard NLTK-based ROUGE.
- The paper lowercases all tokens before evaluation, which can inflate scores compared to case-sensitive ROUGE variants.
- ROUGE scores are inherently biased towards extractive methods that copy salient sentences, making direct comparison with abstractive models challenging.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> evaluation was done using the ROUGE automatic summarization evaluation metric (Lin, 2004) with full-length F-1 ROUGE scores. We lowercase all tokens and perform sentence and word tokenization using spaCy (Honnibal and Johnson, 2015).
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{cohan2018discourse,
title={A Discourse-Aware Attention Model for Abstractive Summarization of Long Documents},
author={Cohan et al. (2018)},
year={2018},
note={arXiv:1804.05685}
}
```
- arXiv: 1804.05685
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!