Abstractive summarisation is notoriously hard to evaluate since standard word-overlap-based metrics are insufficient. We introduce a new evaluation metric which is based on fact-level content weighting, i.e. relating the facts of the document to the facts of the summary. We fol- low the assumption that a good summary will reflect all relevant facts, i.e. the ones present in the ground truth (human-generated refer- ence summary). We confirm this hypothe- sis by showing that our weightings are highly correlated to human perception and compare favourably to the recent manual highlight- based metric of Hardy et al. (2019).

We present our submission to the Simultaneous Translation And Paraphrase for Language Education (STAPLE) challenge. We used a standard Transformer model for translation, with a crosslingual classifier predicting correct translations on the output n-best list. To increase the diversity of the outputs, we used additional data to train the translation model, and we trained a paraphrasing model based on the Levenshtein Transformer architecture to generate further synonymous translations. The paraphrasing results were again filtered using our classifier. While the use of additional data and our classifier filter were able to improve results, the paraphrasing model produced too many invalid outputs to further improve the output quality. Our model without the paraphrasing component finished in the middle of the field for the shared task, improving over the best baseline by a margin of 10-22 % weighted F1 absolute.