A Critique and Improvement of an Evaluation Metric for Text Segmentation

By Lev Pevzner, Marti A. Hearst. International Conference on Computational Logic, 2002

545 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Information Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/52dc40d50a891c6e4b5fa6a046d7009adf63c740

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

1. K. McKeown
2. Mirella Lapata
3. Eric Fosler-Lussier
4. Michel Galley
5. Hongyan Jing
6. Mohit Bansal
7. Christopher D. Manning
8. Jianfeng Gao

In Information Systems

1. Eric Fosler-Lussier
2. K. McKeown
3. Michel Galley
4. Dirk Hovy

Citations in the corpus

• Survey Article: Inter-Coder Agreement for Computational Linguistics (2008, unknown): “See also Pevzner and Hearst (2002) for similar comments made in the context of topic segmentation algorithms, and Klavans, Popper, and Passonneau (2003) for selecting definition phrases.”
• Discourse Segmentation of Multi-Party Conversation (2003, result): “Since it has been argued in (Pevzner and Hearst, 2002) that Pk has some weaknesses, we also include results according to the WindowDiff (WD) metric (which is described in the same work).”
• LLM-Enhanced Semantic Text Segmentation (2025, unknown): “Its advantages over various metrics such as Pk [31] and WinDiff [32] are discussed in [6].”