In text summarization, evaluating the efficacy of automatic metrics without human judgments has become recently popular. One exemplar work concludes that automatic metrics strongly disagree when ranking high-scoring summaries. In this paper, we revisit their experiments and find that their observations stem from the fact that metrics disagree in ranking summaries from any narrow scoring range. We hypothesize that this may be because summaries are similar to each other in a narrow scoring range and are thus, difficult to rank. Apart from the width of the scoring range of summaries, we analyze three other properties that impact inter-metric agreement - Ease of Summarization, Abstractiveness, and Coverage. To encourage reproducible research, we make all our analysis code and data publicly available.

Predicting properties of nodes in a graph is an important problem with applications in a variety of domains. Graph-based Semi-Supervised Learning (SSL) methods aim to address this problem by labeling a small subset of the nodes as seeds and then utilizing the graph structure to predict label scores for the rest of the nodes in the graph. Recently, Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs) have achieved impressive performance on the graph-based SSL task. In addition to label scores, it is also desirable to have confidence scores associated with them. Unfortunately, confidence estimation in the context of GCN has not been previously explored. We fill this important gap in this paper and propose ConfGCN, which estimates labels scores along with their confidences jointly in GCN-based setting. ConfGCN uses these estimated confidences to determine the influence of one node on another during neighborhood aggregation, thereby acquiring anisotropic capabilities. Through extensive analysis and experiments on standard benchmarks, we find that ConfGCN is able to outperform state-of-the-art baselines. We have made ConfGCN's source code available to encourage reproducible research.