While the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in analytical tasks such as mathematics and code generation, their utility for abstractive summarization remains widely assumed but largely unverified. To bridge this gap, we first tailor general reasoning strategies to the summarization domain. We then conduct a systematic, large scale comparative study of 8 reasoning strategies and 3 Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) across 8 diverse datasets, assessing both summary quality and faithfulness. Our findings show that reasoning is not a universal solution and its effectiveness is highly dependent on the specific strategy and context. Specifically, we observe a trade-off between summary quality and factual faithfulness: explicit reasoning strategies tend to improve fluency at the expense of factual grounding, while implicit reasoning in LRMs exhibits the inverse pattern. Furthermore, increasing an LRM's internal reasoning budget does not improve, and can even hurt, factual consistency, suggesting that effective summarization demands faithful compression rather than creative over-thinking.

Ensuring factual consistency in generated text is crucial for reliable natural language processing applications. However, there is a lack of evaluation tools for factual consistency in Russian texts, as existing tools primarily focus on English corpora. To bridge this gap, we introduce AlignRuScore, a comprehensive adaptation of the AlignScore metric for Russian. To adapt the metric, we fine-tuned a RuBERT-based alignment model with task-specific classification and regression heads on Russian and translated English datasets. Our results demonstrate that a unified alignment metric can be successfully ported to Russian, laying the groundwork for robust multilingual factual consistency evaluation. We release the translated corpora, model checkpoints, and code to support further research.

Text-to-image models are known to struggle with generating images that perfectly align with textual prompts. Several previous studies have focused on evaluating image-text alignment in text-to-image generation. However, these evaluations either address overly simple scenarios, especially overlooking the difficulty of prompts with multiple different instances belonging to the same category, or they introduce metrics that do not correlate well with human evaluation. Our findings reveal that current open-source text-to-image models perform poorly on this challenging benchmark. Additionally, we propose the Revise-Then-Enforce approach to enhance image-text alignment. This training-free post-editing method demonstrates improvements in image-text alignment across a broad range of diffusion models. Text-to-Image (T2I) models have demonstrated impressive performance in generating high-quality, realistic images (Betker et al., 2023; Esser et al., 2024). Despite this success, T2I models continue to struggle with accurately interpreting and following user prompts. They may fail to generate objects with the correct number, attributes, or relationships (Li et al., 2024). However, assessing the alignment between text and generated image has remained a longstanding challenge. There are generally three approaches to evaluating image-text alignment. The first approach involves using pretrained image-text models to generate an overall alignment score. CLIP Score (Hessel et al., 2021) is a widely used metric, while VQAScore (Lin et al., 2024) is an improved version of CLIP Score. However, these metrics have several limitations, including their inability to accurately reflect the true alignment between the image and the text (Li et al., 2024) and failing to provide explainable evaluation results. Figure 1: A failure case generated by Stable-Diffusion-3.

Abstractive summarization using large language models (LLMs) has become an essential tool for condensing information. However, despite their ability to generate fluent summaries, these models sometimes produce unfaithful summaries, introducing hallucinations at the word, phrase, or concept level. Existing mitigation strategies, such as post-processing corrections or contrastive learning with synthetically generated negative samples, fail to fully address the diverse errors that can occur in LLM-generated summaries. In this paper, we investigate fine-tuning strategies to reduce the occurrence of unfaithful spans in generated summaries. First, we automatically generate summaries for the set of source documents in the training set with a variety of LLMs and then use GPT-4o to annotate any hallucinations it detects at the span-level. Leveraging these annotations, we fine-tune LLMs with both hallucination-free summaries and annotated unfaithful spans to enhance model faithfulness. In this paper, we introduce a new dataset that contains both faithful and unfaithful summaries with span-level labels and we evaluate three techniques to fine-tuning a LLM to improve the faithfulness of the resulting summarization: gradient ascent, unlikelihood training, and task vector negation. Experimental results show that all three approaches successfully leverage span-level annotations to improve faithfulness, with unlikelihood training being the most effective.

The assessment of evaluation metrics (meta-evaluation) is crucial for determining the suitability of existing metrics in text-to-image (T2I) generation tasks. Human-based meta-evaluation is costly and time-intensive, and automated alternatives are scarce. We address this gap and propose CROC: a scalable framework for automated Contrastive Robustness Checks that systematically probes and quantifies metric robustness by synthesizing contrastive test cases across a comprehensive taxonomy of image properties. With CROC, we generate a pseudo-labeled dataset (CROC$^{syn}$) of over one million contrastive prompt-image pairs to enable a fine-grained comparison of evaluation metrics. We also use the dataset to train CROCScore, a new metric that achieves state-of-the-art performance among open-source methods, demonstrating an additional key application of our framework. To complement this dataset, we introduce a human-supervised benchmark (CROC$^{hum}$) targeting especially challenging categories. Our results highlight robustness issues in existing metrics: for example, many fail on prompts involving negation, and all tested open-source metrics fail on at least 25% of cases involving correct identification of body parts.

Data catalogs serve as repositories for organizing and accessing diverse collection of data assets, but their effectiveness hinges on the ease with which business users can look-up relevant content. Unfortunately, many data catalogs within organizations suffer from limited searchability due to inadequate metadata like asset descriptions. Hence, there is a need of content generation solution to enrich and curate metadata in a scalable way. This paper explores the challenges associated with metadata creation and proposes a unique prompt enrichment idea of leveraging existing metadata content using retrieval based fewshot technique tied with generative large language models (LLM). The literature also considers finetuning an LLM on existing content and studies the behavior of few-shot pretrained LLM (Llama, GPT3.5) vis-à-vis few-shot finetuned LLM (Llama2-7b) by evaluating their performance based on accuracy, factual grounding, and toxicity. Our preliminary results exhibit more than 80% Rouge-1 F1 for the generated content. This implied 87%- 88% of instances accepted as is or curated with minor edits by data stewards. By automatically generating descriptions for tables and columns in most accurate way, the research attempts to provide an overall framework for enterprises to effectively scale metadata curation and enrich its data catalog thereby vastly improving the data catalog searchability and overall usability. NTRODUCTION In the modern digital ecosystem, locating relevant data has become increasingly challenging due to the rapid expansion of data assets.

We study the efficacy of fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) for the specific task of report (government archives, news, intelligence reports) summarization. While this topic is being very actively researched - our specific application set-up faces two challenges: (i) ground-truth summaries maybe unavailable (e.g., for government archives), and (ii) availability of limited compute power - the sensitive nature of the application requires that computation is performed on-premise and for most of our experiments we use one or two A100 GPU cards. Under this set-up we conduct experiments to answer the following questions. First, given that fine-tuning the LLMs can be resource intensive, is it feasible to fine-tune them for improved report summarization capabilities on-premise? Second, what are the metrics we could leverage to assess the quality of these summaries? We conduct experiments on two different fine-tuning approaches in parallel and our findings reveal interesting trends regarding the utility of fine-tuning LLMs. Specifically, we find that in many cases, fine-tuning helps improve summary quality and in other cases it helps by reducing the number of invalid or garbage summaries.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown exceptional performance across various Data-to-Text Generation (DTG) tasks. However, generating factually consistent text in DTG remains challenging for LLMs. Despite this, in-depth evaluations of LLM factual consistency for DTG remain missing in the current literature. This paper addresses this gap by providing an extensive evaluation of factual consistency in LLMs for DTG. Our evaluation covers five widely used DTG datasets (E2E, ViGGo, WikiTableText, DART, and WebNLG) and five prominent LLM families (T5, BART, OPT, BLOOM, and Llama 2). To ensure a thorough evaluation of factual consistency, we use four state-of-the-art automatic metrics and include essential human assessments. Our extensive evaluations reveals three key findings regarding factual consistency in LLMs for DTG. First, Llama 2 often excels in generating factually consistent text, although smaller models like T5 and BART can achieve strong factual consistency on larger, lexically less-diverse datasets. Second, the average rate of change (AROC) indicates that increasing model size (number of model trainable parameters) generally enhances factual consistency of LLMs in DTG. Third, we observe that source-reference divergence (i.e., when the reference text diverges semantically from the source) typically reduces the factual consistency of LLMs in DTG.

Existing automatic prompt engineering methods are typically designed for discriminative tasks, where new task prompts are iteratively refined with limited feedback from a single metric reflecting a single aspect. However, these approaches are suboptimal for generative tasks, which require more nuanced guidance beyond a single numeric metric to improve the prompt and optimize multiple aspects of the generated text. To address these challenges, we propose a novel multi-aspect Critique-Suggestion-guided automatic Prompt Optimization (CriSPO) approach. CriSPO introduces a critique-suggestion module as its core component. This module spontaneously discovers aspects, and compares generated and reference texts across these aspects, providing specific suggestions for prompt modification. These clear critiques and actionable suggestions guide a receptive optimizer module to make more substantial changes, exploring a broader and more effective search space. To further improve CriSPO with multi-metric optimization, we introduce an Automatic Suffix Tuning (AST) extension to enhance the performance of task prompts across multiple metrics. We evaluate CriSPO on 4 state-of-the-art LLMs across 4 summarization and 5 QA datasets. Extensive experiments show 3-4\% ROUGE score improvement on summarization and substantial improvement of various metrics on QA.

In abstractive summarization, the challenge of producing concise and accurate summaries arises from the vast amount of information contained in the source document. Consequently, although Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate fluent text, they often introduce inaccuracies by hallucinating content not found in the original source. While supervised fine-tuning methods that maximize likelihood contribute to this issue, they do not consistently enhance the faithfulness of the summaries. Preference-based optimization methods, such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), can further refine the model to align with human preferences. However, these methods still heavily depend on costly human feedback. In this work, we introduce a novel and straightforward approach called Model-based Preference Optimization (MPO) to fine-tune LLMs for improved summarization abilities without any human feedback. By leveraging the model's inherent summarization capabilities, we create a preference dataset that is fully generated by the model using different decoding strategies. Our experiments on standard summarization datasets and various metrics demonstrate that our proposed MPO significantly enhances the quality of generated summaries without relying on human feedback.