Evaluates multi-domain aspect-based summarization, requiring models to first discover relevant aspects (Wikipedia section titles) from cited references and then generate domain-specific summaries. It probes content selection, cross-document pronoun resolution, and temporal ordering in multi-source generation. Use when the user wants to benchmark on WikiAsp, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports R-2.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Wikiasp Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-wikiasp-eval)
---
name: wikiasp-eval
description: Evaluates multi-domain aspect-based summarization, requiring models to first discover relevant aspects (Wikipedia section titles) from cited references and then generate domain-specific summaries. It probes content selection, cross-document pronoun resolution, and temporal ordering in multi-source generation. Use when the user wants to benchmark on WikiAsp, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports R-2.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2011.07832
bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
confidence: high
---
# wikiasp-eval
> WikiAsp: A Dataset for Multi-domain Aspect-based Summarization — Hayashi et al. (2020) (arXiv:2011.07832, 2020)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates multi-domain aspect-based summarization, requiring models to first discover relevant aspects (Wikipedia section titles) from cited references and then generate domain-specific summaries. It probes content selection, cross-document pronoun resolution, and temporal ordering in multi-source generation.
## Datasets
- **WikiAsp** — total ?; splits: train (-1), test (-1); repo http://github.com/neulab/wikiasp
## Metrics
- `R-2` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- ROUGE-2 recall/precision/F1 based on bigram overlap between the generated summary and the reference summary.
- `R-L` — range: [0, 1]
- ROUGE-L longest common subsequence overlap between generated and reference summaries.
- `F-1` — range: [0, 1]
- Harmonic mean of precision and recall for aspect classification.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Cited reference texts and a target aspect (section title) for summarization; Wikipedia section and cited references for aspect discovery.
**Output**: Aspect label (classification) or generated summary text (summarization).
## Scoring recipe
```python
def score_aspect(preds, gold):
tp = sum(1 for p, g in zip(preds, gold) if p == g and p == 'aspect')
fp = sum(1 for p, g in zip(preds, gold) if p == 'aspect' and g != 'aspect')
fn = sum(1 for p, g in zip(preds, gold) if p != 'aspect' and g == 'aspect')
prec = tp / (tp + fp) if (tp + fp) > 0 else 0
rec = tp / (tp + fn) if (tp + fn) > 0 else 0
return 2 * prec * rec / (prec + rec) if (prec + rec) > 0 else 0
def score_summ(gold, pred):
return rouge_score(gold, pred, rouge_types=['rouge2', 'rougeL'])
```
## Common pitfalls
- Class imbalance in aspect frequency distributions causes poorly calibrated classifiers that achieve high recall but low precision.
- Low ROUGE scores occur even with oracle baselines because important summary phrases are not rare, making n-gram overlap a poor proxy for content quality.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> The automatic evaluation results are shown in Table 5. Neither baseline unanimously outperformed the other on all domains, but we observe that Pre-Summ (abstractive) performs better than TextRank (extractive) on average. The low R-2 and R-L scores by both models despite the oracle being relatively higher suggest that important phrases to be summarized do not appear rarely.[9] ... We show the aspect discovery results in Table 4. ... Class imbalance also plays a role here; predicting the major classes give high recall due to skew aspect frequency distributions.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{hayashi2020wikiasp,
title={WikiAsp: A Dataset for Multi-domain Aspect-based Summarization},
author={Hayashi et al. (2020)},
year={2020},
note={arXiv:2011.07832}
}
```
- arXiv: 2011.07832