Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study constructs and releases a substantial biomedical and life science dataset for long-document summarization, comprising 1.88 million PMC articles, while also evaluating the quality of author-written abstracts as reference summaries. The analysis reveals significant variability in the alignment of these abstracts with their corresponding articles, indicating that quality signals can effectively inform training data selection. By training on high-quality subsets rather than random samples, the authors demonstrate improved performance on factuality-oriented metrics, underscoring the importance of reference quality in scientific summarization.
Quality-aware data selection can significantly enhance the performance of long-document summarization models, outperforming random sampling even at matched training sizes.
Scientific long-document summarization datasets commonly treat author-written abstracts as gold reference summaries, although their quality and alignment with the source article vary. At the same time, publicly available scientific summarization datasets remain limited in scale and structure for modern long-context models. In this work, we address both challenges by a) constructing and releasing one of the largest biomedical and life science datasets for long-document summarization, containing 1.88 million PMC articles, and b) analyzing the reference quality of author-written abstracts with source-grounded and model-based metrics. We show that author-written abstracts vary in their alignment with the full article and that these quality signals can guide training-data selection. Training on selected high-quality subsets outperforms random sampling at matched training sizes and can match or exceed larger random subsets on factuality-oriented metrics. Our findings suggest that reference quality is an important factor in scientific summarization and that quality-aware data selection can improve training efficiency.
