Text Summarization

Large language model (LLM) summarization systems may pass compact vector representations of private inputs to downstream retrieval, monitoring, audit, or analytic workflows. Even when source documents remain access-restricted, derived vectors may be handled under different access controls and still support sensitive-information inference, creating a residual information-disclosure risk. We study this issue in clinical discharge-summary generation as a high-stakes case study, using electronic health record (EHR)-recorded race as a controlled sensitive-label audit. We audit two artifacts that a system might retain or expose to downstream components: the final prompt-token hidden state and the mean-pooled prompt representation. Our results show that reducing recoverability of the case-study sensitive label from one exported artifact does not necessarily reduce recoverability from another. As a mitigation case study, we introduce SurfaceLoRA, an exported-vector-targeted parameter-efficient fine-tuning method that uses a gradient-reversal discriminator attached to a designated exported vector. Under a balanced five-way probing protocol, SurfaceLoRA reduces EHR-recorded race recoverability from the targeted final-token artifact toward chance while preserving summarization utility, yet recoverability remains substantially higher from untargeted pooled artifacts. These findings show that privacy auditing and mitigation should be performed on the exact vector artifact retained or exposed to downstream components.

Objective: To describe the design and early clinical evaluation of The Daily Dose (TDD), an LLM-driven, automated clinical summarization and clinical-trial identification system integrated into routine radiation oncology practice. Design: Mixed-methods evaluation using a cross-sectional, anonymous clinician survey administered after 1 month of system deployment. Exposure: Daily automated delivery of physician-specific email summaries generated using RadOnc-GPT, including patient schedules, concise EHR-derived clinical-status summaries, and automated identification of potentially relevant clinical trials for new or consult visits. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included self-reported usability, satisfaction, perceived usefulness, perceived impact on workflow, time savings, and intention for continued use. Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach's $α$. Results: Among 55 respondents, 52 (94.5%) worked in radiation oncology, and 38 (69.1%) were attending physicians. Most participants (83.6%) reported using TDD daily or several times per week. Mean (SD) scores were 3.89 (1.04) for usability and satisfaction, 3.43 (1.24) for perceived usefulness, and 3.80 (1.17) for impact and future use (5-point Likert scale). Overall satisfaction was positively associated with perceived time savings ($p < .001$). Participants reported variable time savings, with 27% estimating $\geq 10$ minutes saved per day. The questionnaire demonstrated excellent internal consistency (overall Cronbach's $α$ = 0.97).

Chronic dermatologic diseases such as pemphigus require long-term follow-up, generating extensive longitudinal clinical documentation that is difficult to review comprehensively during routine visits and increasing clinician workload as well as the risk of missing critical historical information. We evaluated whether a locally deployed, privacy-preserving small language model (SLM) could retrieve structured clinical features and generate longitudinal summaries from long-term dermatology follow-up records. In this retrospective case series, thirty pemphigus patients contributed 541 visit notes that were aggregated into full longitudinal records (89,336 words); 56 clinically relevant features were annotated by two expert dermatologists. The locally deployed SLM (Qwen3 4B Thinking 2507) was queried with each complete record to retrieve 56 features and generate one final report summaries. Across 1,680 feature retrieval tasks, mean accuracy was 82.25%. Dermatologists' ratings of AI-generated summaries were high for overall quality (8.23-8.47), clinical accuracy (7.93-8.20), and usefulness (8.47-8.50), with no significant inter-evaluator differences and an overall preference for AI summaries in 53.3% of evaluations. These findings suggest that privacy-preserving, locally deployed SLMs can outperform medical experts and reliably generate clinically meaningful longitudinal summaries. SLMs may support clinical decision-making when integrated with appropriate oversight.

We describe our submission to the CLPsych2026 Shared Task on capturing and characterizing mental health changes through social media timeline dynamics. To infer the dominant self-states in posts (Tasks 1.1 and 1.2), we ensemble in-context learning of three open-weight large language models using majority voting. For predicting moments of change in a timeline (Task2), we train supervised classifiers on features derived from Task1.1 predictions. To summarize the patterns of mood dynamics and their progression over time within a timeline (Task 3.1), we augment in-context example labels predicted by upstream systems (Tasks 1.1, 1.2, and 2), yielding performance gains over zero-shot and unaugmented in-context learning baselines. Our submission ranked first on Task1.1, fourth on Task1.2, fourth on Task2, and third on Task~3.1.\footnote{The source code for the experiments is available at https://github.com/amirzia/clpsych26-cuny

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate summaries of software bug reports, including sections such as Steps-to-Reproduce (S2R), Actual Behavior (AB), and Expected Behavior (EB). However, these models frequently produce hallucinations that can be convincing but unsupported by the source report. This can mislead developers and reduce trust in automated maintenance tools. Existing hallucination detection approaches typically evaluate outputs at the full-response level and do not consider the structure of technical documents. An initial exploratory study on 80 structured bug report summaries found that approximately 47.9% contained missing information, while 12.3% included fabricated content, highlighting the need for systematic hallucination analysis in bug report summarization. In this work, we empirically investigate hallucinations in LLM-generated bug report summaries from a section-aware perspective. Using the BugsRepo dataset, derived from Mozilla OSS projects, we introduce controlled synthetic hallucination injection to construct a benchmark for training and evaluation. We propose a section-aware hallucination detection approach that jointly predicts whether a summary contains hallucinated content, identifies affected sections, and classifies hallucination types. Experimental results across multiple pretrained language models show that the proposed approach achieves strong performance across all tasks, with the best model obtaining 0.89 report-level Macro-F1, 0.83 section-level Macro-F1, and 0.84 hallucination-type Macro-F1. We further analyze common hallucination patterns and model failure modes to better understand limitations of current LLM-generated bug report summaries. The findings highlight the importance of section-aware hallucination analysis for improving the reliability of LLM-assisted bug report summarization in software maintenance workflows.

While social media platforms, such as Twitter, provide a medium for large-scale opinion sharing during news events, it is manually impossible for individuals or media agencies to process the vast volume of content to identify key viewpoints. In order to resolve this, several automatic summarization techniques have been proposed to condense large collections of tweets into concise and informative summaries. However, these algorithms do not explicitly consider demographic fairness. Several existing research works have developed automated summarization approaches that can provide a holistic overview of the key aspects and major opinions shared on social media platforms related to a news event. However, these approaches do not explicitly consider different forms of demographic representation, such as gender, which can lead to biased summary representation. In this paper, we propose EquiSumm, which considers the gender aspect of the shared opinion to generate a summary, and our experimental analysis on two major datasets indicates the performance effectiveness with respect to existing research works.

We present DreamerNLplus, a hybrid framework for modeling mental health dynamics from social media timelines in the CLPsych 2026 shared task. Our system addresses three tasks: psychological state modeling, temporal change detection, and sequence-level summarization. For Task 1, we combine LLM-based data augmentation, DeBERTa classification, and Random Forest regression for structured state prediction. For Task 2, we use few-shot prompting with a locally deployed Llama 3.1 model to detect Switch and Escalation events using short-term temporal context. For Task 3.1, we explore both a deterministic rule-based summarization pipeline and a few-shot LLM-based approach, ranking \textbf{2nd} officially. Our RAG-based method achieves strong performance in Task 3.2, ranking \textbf{1st} for Improvement and \textbf{3rd} for Deterioration, demonstrating its ability to capture recurrent psychological change patterns across timelines. Our analysis reveals key challenges, including the mismatch between classification and regression performance, the difficulty of modeling temporal transitions, and the disagreement between semantic and similarity-based evaluation metrics. These findings highlight the complexity of modeling mental health dynamics and motivate future work on unified evaluation frameworks. We share our code and prompts at https://github.com/4dpicture/CLPsych2026

Biomedical abstracts play a critical role in downstream NLP applications, such as information retrieval, biocuration, and biomedical knowledge discovery. However, a non-trivial number of biomedical articles do not have abstracts, diminishing the utility of these articles for downstream tasks. We propose DPR-BAG (Divide, Prompt, and Refine for Biomedical Abstract Generation), a training-free, zero-shot framework that generates coherent and factually grounded abstracts for biomedical articles with full text but no abstract. DPR-BAG decomposes full-text documents into structured rhetorical facets following the Background-Objective-Methods-Results-Conclusions (BOMRC) schema, performs parallel LLM-based summarization for each facet, and applies a final refinement stage to restore global discourse coherence. On PMC-MAD, a distribution-aligned dataset of 46,309 biomedical articles, DPR-BAG improves abstractive novelty over strong extractive and fine-tuned baselines, while maintaining factual consistency. Our ablation study reveals a counterintuitive finding: increasing prompt complexity or explicitly injecting entity-level guidance can degrade factual alignment, highlighting the importance of controlled prompting strategies. These findings underscore the potential of training-free, structure-aware frameworks for scalable biomedical abstract generation in low-resource settings. Our data and code are available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/pmc-mad/PMC-MAD and https://github.com/ScienceNLP-Lab/MultiTagger-v2/tree/main/DPR-BAG.

Large language models pretrained on general-domain corpora often exhibit tokenization inefficiencies when applied to specialized domains. Although continual pretraining for domain adaptation partially alleviate performance degradation, it does not resolve the fundamental vocabulary mismatch. To address this gap, we introduce a targeted parameter-efficient domain adaptation approach that combines vocabulary adaptation with pretraining for LLM-based text summarization. Our unified framework augments pretrained tokenizers with domain-specific tokens while selectively replacing under-trained and unreachable tokens to limit parameter growth. We evaluate our approach on Llama-3.1-8B and Qwen2.5-7B across legal and medical summarization tasks on a challenge-oriented evaluation protocol focused on expert-driven text and summaries which typically has higher concentration of over-fragmented Out-of-Vocabulary (OOV) words. The vocabulary adaptation algorithm enhances the overall quality of the summarization model by improving semantic similarity between the generated summaries and their references. In addition, the adapted model produces summaries that incorporate more appropriate novel and domain-specific words, leading to improved coherence, relevance, and faithfulness. We further observe that our proposed approach significantly reduce training time by $35-55\%$ over continual pretraining and reduce parameter counts up to $37\%$ w.r.t expansion-only methods. We make the codebase publicly available at https://github.com/gb-kgp/VocabReplace-Then-Expand.

Product reviews significantly influence purchasing decisions on e-commerce platforms. However, the sheer volume of reviews can overwhelm users, obscuring the information most relevant to their specific needs. Current e-commerce summarization systems typically produce generic, static summaries that fail to account for the fact that (i) different users care about different product characteristics, and (ii) these preferences may evolve with interactions. To address the challenge of unknown latent preferences, we propose an online learning framework that generates personalized summaries for each user. Our system iteratively refines its understanding of user preferences by incorporating feedback directly from the generated summaries over time. We provide a case study using the Amazon Reviews'23 dataset, showing in controlled simulations that online preference learning improves alignment with target user interests while maintaining summary quality.

Large-scale datasets are widely used to perform summarization tasks, but they may not include queries alongside documents and summaries. In the search for suitable datasets for Query-Focused Summarization (QFS), we identify two research questions: Is it possible to automatically generate evidence-based query keywords from query-free datasets? Does evidence-based query generation support the QFS task? This paper proposes an evidence-based model to generate queries from query-free datasets. To evaluate our model intrinsically, we compare the similarity between the original queries and the system-generated queries of two QFS datasets. We also perform summarization tasks using different pre-trained models, as well as a state-of-the-art (SOTA) QFS model, to measure the extrinsic performance of our query generation approach. Experimental results indicate that summaries generated using evidence-based queries achieve competitive ROUGE scores compared to those generated from the original queries.

Movie scripts pose a fundamental challenge for automatic summarization due to their non-linear, cross-cut narrative structure, which makes surface-level saliency methods ineffective at preserving core story progression. To address this, we introduce S^2tory (Story Spine Distillation), a narratology-grounded framework that leverages character development trajectories to identify plot nuclei, the essential events that drive the narrative forward, while filtering out peripheral satellite events that merely enrich atmosphere or emotion. Our Narrative Expert Agent (NEAgent) performs theory-constrained reasoning, whose distilled knowledge conditions a small model to identify plot nuclei. Another model then uses these plot nuclei to generate the summary. Experiments on the MovieSum dataset demonstrate state-of-the-art semantic fidelity at approximately 3.5x compression, and zero-shot evaluation on BookSum confirms strong out-of-domain generalization. Human evaluation further validates that narratological theory provides an indispensable foundation for modeling complex, non-linear narratives.

Plain Language Summaries (PLS) aim to make research accessible to lay readers, but they are typically written in a one-size-fits-all style that ignores differences in readers' information needs and comprehension. In health contexts, this limitation is particularly important because misunderstanding scientific information can affect real-world decisions. Large language models (LLMs) offer new opportunities for personalizing PLS, but it remains unclear whether personalization helps, which strategies are most effective, and how to balance personalization with safety. We introduce ReLay, a dataset of 300 participant--PLS pairs from 50 lay participants in both static (expert-written) and interactive (LLM-personalized) settings. ReLay includes user characteristics, health information needs, information-seeking behavior, comprehension outcomes, interaction logs, and quality ratings. We use ReLay to evaluate five LLMs across two personalization methods. Personalization improves comprehension and perceived quality, but it also raises the risk of reinforcing user biases and introducing hallucinations, revealing a trade-off between personalization and safety. These findings highlight the need for personalization methods that are both effective and trustworthy for diverse lay audiences.

Privacy policies are essential for users to understand how service providers handle their personal data. However, these documents are often long and complex, as well as filled with technobabble and legalese, causing users to unknowingly accept terms that may even contradict the law. While summarizing and interpreting these privacy policies is crucial, there is a lack of high-quality English parallel corpus optimized for legal clarity and readability. To address this issue, we introduce APPSI-139, a high-quality English privacy policy corpus meticulously annotated by domain experts, specifically designed for summarization and interpretation tasks. The corpus includes 139 English privacy policies, 15,692 rewritten parallel corpora, and 36,351 fine-grained annotation labels across 11 data practice categories. Concurrently, we propose TCSI-pp-V2, a hybrid privacy policy summarization and interpretation framework that employs an alternating training strategy and coordinates multiple expert modules to effectively balance computational efficiency and accuracy. Experimental results show that the hybrid summarization system built on APPSI-139 corpus and the TCSI-pp-V2 framework outperform large language models, such as GPT-4o and LLaMA-3-70B, in terms of readability and reliability. The source code and dataset are available at https://github.com/EnlightenedAI/APPSI-139.

Reliable evaluation of large language model (LLM)-generated summaries remains an open challenge, particularly across heterogeneous domains and document lengths. We conduct a comprehensive meta-evaluation of 14 automatic summarization metrics and LLM-based evaluators across seven datasets spanning five domains, covering documents from short news articles to long scientific, governmental, and legal texts (2K-27K words) with over 1,500 human-annotated summaries. Our results show that traditional lexical overlap metrics (e.g., ROUGE, BLEU) exhibit weak or negative correlation with human judgments, while task-specific neural metrics and LLM-based evaluators achieve substantially higher alignment, especially for linguistic quality assessment. Leveraging these findings, we propose LLM-ReSum, a self-reflective summarization framework that integrates LLM-based evaluation and generation in a closed feedback loop without model finetuning. Across three domains, LLM-ReSum improves low-quality summaries by up to 33% in factual accuracy and 39% in coverage, with human evaluators preferring refined summaries in 89% of cases. We additionally introduce PatentSumEval, a new human-annotated benchmark for legal document summarization comprising 180 expert-evaluated summaries. All code and datasets will be released in GitHub.

Evaluating long document summaries remains the primary bottleneck in summarization research. Existing metrics correlate weakly with human judgments and produce aggregate scores without explaining deficiencies or guiding improvement, preventing effective refinement in applications requiring verifiable accuracy. We introduce LongSumEval, a unified framework bridging evaluation and generation through structured question-answering feedback. The framework operationalizes summary quality as answerability and factual alignment of question-answer pairs, generating interpretable scores and actionable feedback that identifies coverage gaps and factual inconsistencies. This resolves the misalignment where evaluation operates independently of generation objectives. Meta-evaluation of our QA-based evaluation module across seven benchmarks demonstrates substantially stronger agreement with human judgments compared to established metrics. Structured feedback enables significant quality improvements through self-refinement without retraining. By demonstrating that evaluation feedback can serve as executable instructions for generation, this work establishes a generalizable paradigm for aligning assessment with improvement, with direct implications for controllable text generation requiring verifiable accuracy and transparent quality control. All code and datasets will be released in GitHub for reproducibility.

Multi-document news summarisation systems are increasingly adopted for their convenience in processing vast daily news content, making fairness across diverse political perspectives critical. However, these systems can exhibit political bias through unequal representation of viewpoints, disproportionate emphasis on certain perspectives, and systematic underrepresentation of minority voices. This study presents a comprehensive evaluation of such bias in multi-document news summarisation using FairNews, a dataset of complete news articles with political orientation labels, examining how large language models (LLMs) handle sources with varying political leanings across 13 models and five fairness metrics. We investigate both baseline model performance and effectiveness of various debiasing interventions, including prompt-based and judge-based approaches. Our findings challenge the assumption that larger models yield fairer outputs, as mid-sized variants consistently outperform their larger counterparts, offering the best balance of fairness and efficiency. Prompt-based debiasing proves highly model dependent, while entity sentiment emerges as the most stubborn fairness dimension, resisting all intervention strategies tested. These results demonstrate that fairness in multi-document news summarisation requires multi-dimensional evaluation frameworks and targeted, architecture-aware debiasing rather than simply scaling up.

Summarizing long, domain-specific documents with large language models (LLMs) remains challenging due to context limitations, information loss, and hallucinations, particularly in clinical and legal settings. We propose a Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT)-based multi-resolution framework that treats text as a semantic signal and decomposes it into global (approximation) and local (detail) components. Applied to sentence- or word-level embeddings, DWT yields compact representations that preserve overall structure and critical domain-specific details, which are used directly as summaries or to guide LLM generation. Experiments on clinical and legal benchmarks demonstrate comparable ROUGE-L scores. Compared to a GPT-4o baseline, the DWT based summarization consistently improve semantic similarity and grounding, achieving gains of over 2% in BERTScore, more than 4% in Semantic Fidelity, factual consistency in legal tasks, and large METEOR improvements indicative of preserved domain-specific semantics. Across multiple embedding models, Fidelity reaches up to 97%, suggesting that DWT acts as a semantic denoising mechanism that reduces hallucinations and strengthens factual grounding. Overall, DWT provides a lightweight, generalizable method for reliable long-document and domain-specific summarization with LLMs.

Increasingly, studies are exploring using Large Language Models (LLMs) for accelerated or scaled qualitative analysis of text data. While we can compare LLM accuracy against human labels directly for deductive coding, or labeling text, it is more challenging to judge the ethics and effectiveness of using LLMs in abstractive methods such as inductive thematic analysis. We collaborate with psychologists to study the abstractive claims LLMs make about human life stories, asking, how does using an LLM as an interpreter of meaning affect the conclusions and perspectives of a study? We propose a summarization-based pipeline for surfacing biases in perspective-taking an LLM might employ in interpreting these life stories. We demonstrate that our pipeline can identify both race and gender bias with the potential for representational harm. Finally, we encourage the use of this analysis in future studies involving LLM-based interpretation of study participants' written text or transcribed speech to characterize a positionality portrait for the study.

Desktop interaction streams provide a continuous, privacy-sensitive record of interleaved user tasks. Transforming these streams into task-organized personal logs on-device faces two main challenges: exhaustive Vision-Language Model (VLM) processing strains local resources, and global stream processing causes cross-task context pollution. We present FOCAL (Filtered On-device Continuous Activity Logging), a privacy-first multi-agent system utilizing a unified filter-plan-log architecture. It cascades a lightweight Filter Agent for noise suppression, a text-only Brain Agent for task attribution, a Record Agent for selective visual reasoning, and a task-isolated Memory Agent for context-coherent summarization. Experiments on DesktopBench (comprising 2,572 screenshots across 420 complex sessions) show FOCAL reduces total token consumption by 60.4% and VLM call count by 72.3% versus a baseline, while boosting Key Information Recall (KIR) from 0.38 to 0.61. Crucially, under $A{\to}B{\to}A$ task interruptions, FOCAL maintains Task Acc 0.81 and KIR 0.80, whereas the baseline collapses to Task Acc 0.03. FOCAL pioneers the efficient, on-device summarization of instruction-free desktop streams into multi-perspective personal logs.

Understanding how policy is debated and justified in parliament is a fundamental aspect of the democratic process. However, the volume and complexity of such debates mean that outside audiences struggle to engage. Meanwhile, Large Language Models (LLMs) have been shown to enable automated summarisation at scale. While summaries of debates can make parliamentary procedures more accessible, evaluating whether these summaries faithfully communicate argumentative content remains challenging. Existing automated summarisation metrics have been shown to correlate poorly with human judgements of consistency (i.e., faithfulness or alignment between summary and source). In this work, we propose a formal framework for evaluating parliamentary debate summaries that grounds argument structures in the contested proposals up for debate. Our novel approach, driven by computational argumentation, focuses the evaluation on formal properties concerning the faithful preservation of the reasoning presented to justify or oppose policy outcomes. We demonstrate our methods using a case-study of debates from the European Parliament and associated LLM-driven summaries.

Small language models (SLMs), such as BART, can achieve summarization performance comparable to large language models (LLMs) via distillation. However, existing LLM-based ranking strategies for summary candidates suffer from instability, while classical metrics (e.g., ROUGE) are insufficient to rank high-quality summaries. To address these issues, we introduce \textbf{SCURank}, a framework that enhances summarization by leveraging \textbf{Summary Content Units (SCUs)}. Instead of relying on unstable comparisons or surface-level overlap, SCURank evaluates summaries based on the richness and semantic importance of information content. We investigate the effectiveness of SCURank in distilling summaries from multiple diverse LLMs. Experimental results demonstrate that SCURank outperforms traditional metrics and LLM-based ranking methods across evaluation measures and datasets. Furthermore, our findings show that incorporating diverse LLM summaries enhances model abstractiveness and overall distilled model performance, validating the benefits of information-centric ranking in multi-LLM distillation. The code for SCURank is available at https://github.com/IKMLab/SCURank.

Topic-controlled summarisation enables users to generate summaries focused on specific aspects of source documents. This paper investigates a data augmentation strategy for training small language models (sLMs) to perform topic-controlled summarisation. We propose a pairwise data augmentation method that combines contexts from different documents to create contrastive training examples, enabling models to learn the relationship between topics and summaries more effectively. Using the SciTLDR dataset enriched with Wikipedia-derived topics, we systematically evaluate how augmentation scale affects model performance. Results show consistent improvements in win rate and semantic alignment as the augmentation scale increases, while the amount of real training data remains fixed. Consequently, a T5-base model trained with our augmentation approach achieves competitive performance relative to larger models, despite using significantly fewer parameters and substantially fewer real training examples.

Summarizing deeply nested discussion threads requires handling interleaved replies, quotes, and overlapping topics, which standard LLM summarizers struggle to capture reliably. We introduce ThreadSumm, a multi-stage LLM framework that treats thread summarization as a hierarchical reasoning problem over explicit aspect and content unit representations. Our method first performs content planning via LLM-based extraction of discourse aspects and Atomic Content Units, then applies sentence ordering to construct thread-aware sequences that surface multiple viewpoints rather than a single linear strand. On top of these interpretable units, ThreadSumm employs a Tree of Thoughts search that generates and scores multiple paragraph candidates, jointly optimizing coherence and coverage within a unified search space. With this multi-proposal and iterative refinement design, we show improved performance in generating logically structured summaries compared to existing baselines, while achieving higher aspect retention and opinion coverage in nested discussions.

Recent advances in summarization research focus on improving summary quality across multiple criteria, such as completeness, conciseness, and faithfulness, by jointly optimizing these dimensions. However, these efforts largely overlook the challenge of controlling summary generation with respect to individual criteria, especially in the presence of their inherent trade-offs. For example, enhancing conciseness can compromise completeness, and vice versa. In this work, we address this gap by proposing a loss function that aligns model outputs with fine-grained, model-based evaluation scores (e.g., from FineSurE), enabling both improvement in summary quality and dimension-specific control. Our approach improves the overall quality of summaries while maintaining the ability to selectively prioritize one criterion over others. Experiments on three pretrained models (LLaMA, Qwen, and Mistral) demonstrate that our method achieves performance comparable to state-of-the-art summarizers, while uniquely offering strong controllability over individual quality dimensions.

Multi-role dialogue summarization requires modeling complex interactions among multiple speakers while preserving role-specific information and factual consistency. However, most existing methods optimize for automatic metrics such as ROUGE and BERTScore, which favor surface-level imitation of references rather than genuine gains in faithfulness or alignment with human preferences. We propose a novel framework that couples explicit cognitive-style reasoning with reward-based optimization for multi-role dialogue summarization. Our method first distills structured reasoning traces (e.g., step-by-step inferences and intermediate reflections) from a large teacher model and uses them as auxiliary supervision to initialize a reasoning-aware summarizer via staged supervised fine-tuning. It then applies GRPO with a dual-principle reward that blends metric-based signals with human-aligned criteria targeting key information coverage, implicit inference, factual faithfulness, and conciseness. Experiments on multilingual multi-role dialogue benchmarks show that our method matches strong baselines on ROUGE and BERTScore. Specifically, results on CSDS confirm the framework's stability in semantic consistency, while in-depth analysis on SAMSum demonstrates clear gains in factual faithfulness and model-based preference alignment. These findings underscore the value of reasoning-aware and preference-aware training for reliable dialogue summarization. Checkpoints and datasets are available at https://huggingface.co/collections/NebulaPixel/summorchestra-multirole-summary.

Software documentation is essential for program comprehension, developer onboarding, code review, and long-term maintenance. Yet producing quality documentation manually is time-consuming and frequently yields incomplete or inconsistent results. Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising solution by automatically generating natural language descriptions from source code, helping developers understand code more efficiently, facilitating maintenance, and supporting downstream activities such as defect localization and commit message generation. However, the effectiveness of LLMs in documentation tasks critically depends on how they are prompted. Properly structured instructions can substantially improve model performance, making prompt engineering-the design of input prompts to guide model behavior-a foundational technique in LLM-based software engineering. Approaches such as few-shot prompting, chain-of-thought reasoning, retrieval-augmented generation, and zero-shot learning show promise for code summarization, yet current research remains fragmented. There is limited understanding of which prompting strategies work best, for which models, and under what conditions. Moreover, evaluation practices vary widely, with most studies relying on overlap-based metrics that may not capture semantic quality. This systematic literature review consolidates existing evidence, categorizes prompting paradigms, examines their effectiveness, and identifies gaps to guide future research and practical adoption.

Scientific discovery is slowed by fragmented literature that requires excessive human effort to gather, analyze, and understand. AI tools, including autonomous summarization and question answering, have been developed to aid in understanding scientific literature. However, these tools lack the structured, multi-step approach necessary for extracting deep insights from scientific literature. Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new possibilities for literature analysis, but remain unreliable due to hallucinations and incomplete extraction. We introduce Elhuyar, a multi-agent, human-in-the-loop system that integrates LLMs, structured AI, and human scientists to extract, analyze, and iteratively refine insights from scientific literature. The framework distributes tasks among specialized agents for filtering papers, extracting data, fitting models, and summarizing findings, with human oversight ensuring reliability. The system generates structured reports with extracted data, visualizations, model equations, and text summaries, enabling deeper inquiry through iterative refinement. Deployed in materials science, it analyzed literature on tungsten under helium-ion irradiation, showing experimentally correlated exponential helium bubble growth with irradiation dose and temperature, offering insight for plasma-facing materials (PFMs) in fusion reactors. This demonstrates how AI-assisted literature review can uncover scientific patterns and accelerate discovery.

The explosive growth of AI research has created unprecedented information overload, increasing the demand for scientific summarization at multiple levels of granularity beyond traditional abstracts. While LLMs are increasingly adopted for summarization, existing benchmarks remain limited in scale, target only a single granularity, and predate the LLM era. Moreover, since the release of ChatGPT in November 2022, researchers have rapidly adopted LLMs for drafting manuscripts themselves, fundamentally transforming scientific writing, yet no resource exists to analyze how this writing has evolved. To bridge these gaps, we introduce SciZoom, a benchmark comprising 44,946 papers from four top-tier ML venues (NeurIPS, ICLR, ICML, EMNLP) spanning 2020 to 2025, explicitly stratified into Pre-LLM and Post-LLM eras. SciZoom provides three hierarchical summarization targets (Abstract, Contributions, and TL;DR) achieving compression ratios up to 600:1, enabling both multi-granularity summarization research and temporal mining of scientific writing patterns. Our linguistic analysis reveals striking shifts in phrase patterns (up to 10x for formulaic expressions) and rhetorical style (23% decline in hedging), suggesting that LLM-assisted writing produces more confident yet homogenized prose. SciZoom serves as both a challenging benchmark and a unique resource for mining the evolution of scientific discourse in the generative AI era. Our code and dataset are publicly available on GitHub (https://github.com/janghana/SciZoom) and Hugging Face (https://huggingface.co/datasets/hanjang/SciZoom), respectively.

Evidence-grounded generation produces summaries whose claims should be supported by supplied evidence, but claim-level verifiers provide noisy feedback and can reward models that simply say less. We study this problem in clinical Brief Hospital Course summarization, where outputs must remain grounded in patient-specific EHR evidence. We introduce VERI-DPO, a preference-mining framework that converts noisy claim verification into coverage-controlled summary-level preferences. For each evidence-window prompt, VERI-DPO samples multiple candidate summaries, decomposes them into claims, verifies each claim against patient evidence, and forms a preference pair only when the chosen summary has better aggregate verifier-estimated support while retaining comparable verifiable content. Standard Direct Preference Optimization then distills these pairs into a single-sample policy, avoiding inference-time reranking. On patient-disjoint MIMIC-III-Ext-VeriFact-BHC test data, VERI-DPO reduces Not Supported rates from 10.7% to 1.9% under the mining verifier and from 11.6% to 6.4% under a separately prompted GPT-4o judge. In 100 blinded pairwise assessments by two domain researchers, VERI-DPO is preferred over the base model 56 times versus 18 times for factual faithfulness. In a locked zero-shot MIMIC-IV-Ext-BHC transfer test with 1,000 patients and no model adaptation, VERI-DPO lowers Not Supported rates with nearly unchanged scored-claim counts. Multi-seed ablations show that verifier-guided pair construction drives the gains, while coverage and anti-degeneration controls prevent apparent factuality improvements from coming from shorter or less checkable outputs.