In e-commerce, opinion summarization is the process of summarizing the consensus opinions found in product reviews. However, the potential of additional sources such as product description and question-answers (QA) has been considered less often. Moreover, the absence of any supervised training data makes this task challenging. To address this, we propose a novel synthetic dataset creation (SDC) strategy that leverages information from reviews as well as additional sources for selecting one of the reviews as a pseudo-summary to enable supervised training. Our Multi-Encoder Decoder framework for Opinion Summarization (MEDOS) employs a separate encoder for each source, enabling effective selection of information while generating the summary. For evaluation, due to the unavailability of test sets with additional sources, we extend the Amazon, Oposum+, and Flipkart test sets and leverage ChatGPT to annotate summaries. Experiments across nine test sets demonstrate that the combination of our SDC approach and MEDOS model achieves on average a 14.5% improvement in ROUGE-1 F1 over the SOTA. Moreover, comparative analysis underlines the significance of incorporating additional sources for generating more informative summaries. Human evaluations further indicate that MEDOS scores relatively higher in coherence and fluency with 0.41 and 0.5 (−1 to 1) respectively, compared to existing models. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to generate opinion summaries leveraging additional sources in a self-supervised setting.

Evaluation of opinion summaries using conventional reference-based metrics often fails to provide a comprehensive assessment and exhibits limited correlation with human judgments. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise as reference-free metrics for NLG evaluation, their potential remains unexplored for opinion summary evaluation. Furthermore, the absence of sufficient opinion summary evaluation datasets hinders progress in this area. In response, we introduce the SUMMEVAL-OP dataset, encompassing 7 dimensions crucial to the evaluation of opinion summaries: fluency, coherence, relevance, faithfulness, aspect coverage, sentiment consistency, and specificity. We propose OP-I-PROMPT, a dimension-independent prompt, along with OP-PROMPTS, a dimension-dependent set of prompts for opinion summary evaluation. Our experiments demonstrate that OP-I-PROMPT emerges as a good alternative for evaluating opinion summaries, achieving an average Spearman correlation of 0.70 with human judgments, surpassing prior methodologies. Remarkably, we are the first to explore the efficacy of LLMs as evaluators, both on closed-source and open-source models, in the opinion summary evaluation domain.