Tuan A. Tran


Fixing paper assignments

  1. Please select all papers that belong to the same person.
  2. Indicate below which author they should be assigned to.
Provide a valid ORCID iD here. This will be used to match future papers to this author.
Provide the name of the school or the university where the author has received or will receive their highest degree (e.g., Ph.D. institution for researchers, or current affiliation for students). This will be used to form the new author page ID, if needed.

TODO: "submit" and "cancel" buttons here


2025

pdf bib
LCFO: Long Context and Long Form Output Dataset and Benchmarking
Marta R. Costa-jussà | Pierre Andrews | Mariano Coria Meglioli | Joy Chen | Joe Chuang | David Dale | Christophe Ropers | Alexandre Mourachko | Eduardo Sánchez | Holger Schwenk | Tuan A. Tran | Arina Turkatenko | Carleigh Wood
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025

This paper presents the Long Context and Form Output (LCFO) benchmark, a novel evaluation framework for assessing gradual summarization and summary expansion capabilities across diverse domains. LCFO consists of long input documents (5k words average length), each of which comes with three summaries of different lengths (20%, 10%, and 5% of the input text), as well as approximately 15 questions and answers (QA) related to the input content. Notably, LCFO also provides alignments between specific QA pairs and corresponding summaries in 7 domains. The primary motivation behind providing summaries of different lengths is to establish a controllable framework for generating long texts from shorter inputs, i.e. summary expansion. To establish an evaluation metric framework for summarization and summary expansion, we provide human evaluation scores for human-generated outputs, as well as results from various state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs). GPT-4o-mini achieves best human scores among automatic systems in both summarization and summary expansion tasks (≈ +10% and +20%, respectively). It even surpasses human output quality in the case of short summaries (≈ +7%). Overall automatic metrics achieve low correlations with human evaluation scores (≈ 0.4) but moderate correlation on specific evaluation aspects such as fluency and attribution (≈ 0.6).