Text simplification intends to make a text easier to read while preserving its core meaning. Intuitively and as shown in previous works, these two dimensions (simplification and meaning preservation) are often-times inversely correlated. An overly conservative text will fail to simplify sufficiently, whereas extreme simplification will degrade meaning preservation. Yet, popular evaluation metrics either aggregate meaning preservation and simplification into a single score (SARI, LENS), or target meaning preservation alone (BERTScore, QuestEval). Moreover, these metrics usually require a set of references and most previous work has only focused on sentence-level simplification. In this paper, we focus on the evaluation of document-level text simplification and compare existing models using distinct metrics for meaning preservation and simplification. We leverage existing metrics from similar tasks and introduce a reference-less metric variant for simplicity, showing that models are mostly biased towards either simplification or meaning preservation, seldom performing well on both dimensions. Making use of the fact that the metrics we use are all reference-less, we also investigate the performance of existing models when applied to unseen data (where reference simplifications are unavailable).

To date, most work on text simplification has focused on sentence-level inputs. Early attempts at document simplification merely applied these approaches iteratively over the sentences of a document. However, this fails to coherently preserve the discourse structure, leading to suboptimal output quality. Recently, strategies from controllable simplification have been leveraged to achieve state-of-the-art results on document simplification by first generating a document-level plan (a sequence of sentence-level simplification operations) and using this plan to guide sentence-level simplification downstream. However, this is still limited in that the simplification model has no direct access to the local inter-sentence document context, likely having a negative impact on surface realisation. We explore various systems that use document context within the simplification process itself, either by iterating over larger text units or by extending the system architecture to attend over a high-level representation of document context. In doing so, we achieve state-of-the-art performance on the document simplification task, even when not relying on plan-guidance. Further, we investigate the performance and efficiency tradeoffs of system variants and make suggestions of when each should be preferred.

Automatic evaluation for sentence simplification remains a challenging problem. Most popular evaluation metrics require multiple high-quality references – something not readily available for simplification – which makes it difficult to test performance on unseen domains. Furthermore, most existing metrics conflate simplicity with correlated attributes such as fluency or meaning preservation. We propose a new learned evaluation metric — SLE — which focuses on simplicity, outperforming almost all existing metrics in terms of correlation with human judgements.

Most existing work on text simplification is limited to sentence-level inputs, with attempts to iteratively apply these approaches to document-level simplification failing to coherently preserve the discourse structure of the document. We hypothesise that by providing a high-level view of the target document, a simplification plan might help to guide generation. Building upon previous work on controlled, sentence-level simplification, we view a plan as a sequence of labels, each describing one of four sentence-level simplification operations (copy, rephrase, split, or delete). We propose a planning model that labels each sentence in the input document while considering both its context (a window of surrounding sentences) and its internal structure (a token-level representation). Experiments on two simplification benchmarks (Newsela-auto and Wiki-auto) show that our model outperforms strong baselines both on the planning task and when used to guide document-level simplification models.

Different types of transformations have been used to model sentence simplification ranging from mainly local operations such as phrasal or lexical rewriting, deletion and re-ordering to the more global affecting the whole input sentence such as sentence rephrasing, copying and splitting. In this paper, we propose a novel approach to sentence simplification which encompasses four global operations: whether to rephrase or copy and whether to split based on syntactic or discourse structure. We create a novel dataset that can be used to train highly accurate classification systems for these four operations. We propose a controllable-simplification model that tailors simplifications to these operations and show that it outperforms both end-to-end, non-controllable approaches and previous controllable approaches.

Sentence splitting involves the segmentation of a sentence into two or more shorter sentences. It is a key component of sentence simplification, has been shown to help human comprehension and is a useful preprocessing step for NLP tasks such as summarisation and relation extraction. While several methods and datasets have been proposed for developing sentence splitting models, little attention has been paid to how sentence splitting interacts with discourse structure. In this work, we focus on cases where the input text contains a discourse connective, which we refer to as discourse-based sentence splitting. We create synthetic and organic datasets for discourse-based splitting and explore different ways of combining these datasets using different model architectures. We show that pipeline models which use discourse structure to mediate sentence splitting outperform end-to-end models in learning the various ways of expressing a discourse relation but generate text that is less grammatical; that large scale synthetic data provides a better basis for learning than smaller scale organic data; and that training on discourse-focused, rather than on general sentence splitting data provides a better basis for discourse splitting.

Transfer learning (TL) proposes to enhance machine learning performance on a problem, by reusing labeled data originally designed for a related problem. In particular, domain adaptation consists, for a specific task, in reusing training data developed for the same task but a distinct domain. This is particularly relevant to the applications of deep learning in Natural Language Processing, because those usually require large annotated corpora that may not exist for the targeted domain, but exist for side domains. In this paper, we experiment with TL for the task of Relation Extraction (RE) from biomedical texts, using the TreeLSTM model. We empirically show the impact of TreeLSTM alone and with domain adaptation by obtaining better performances than the state of the art on two biomedical RE tasks and equal performances for two others, for which few annotated data are available. Furthermore, we propose an analysis of the role that syntactic features may play in TL for RE.