Multimodal long documents are core carriers of professional knowledge, where critical evidence is sparsely distributed across paragraphs and modalities. This easily causes key information omission and cross-modal hallucinations in summarization by multimodal LLMs. These issues stem from attention drift in long-range dependency modeling and gaps in inter-modal alignment. To address this, we introduce MMLDSum-Bench, a high-quality benchmark for multimodal long-document summarization, covering multiple domains, context-length scales, and visual-textual modality distributions. We further propose MMLDSum-LLM, a reproducible two-stage training framework that combines supervised fine-tuning with visual-alignment weighted loss and keyword-aware weighted loss, followed by GRPO with a multi-objective reward (keyword coverage, image-text alignment, ROUGE, and length control). Extensive experiments on MMLDSum-Bench, comparing against leading closed-source and open-source multimodal models under a unified evaluation protocol - including LLM-as-a-judge scoring, atomic-claim precision/recall, image-text alignment (ITA), and ROUGE - demonstrate that our approach significantly improves key-information coverage and cross-modal consistency.
Although large language models (LLMs) have shown promising potential in news summarization tasks, their performance on long-document summarization remains challenging as their length often exceeds the input limits. As the agent investment, which provide possibility to improve the inherent capabilities of LLMs. To enhance the effectiveness of long-document summarization based on LLMs, this paper proposes an expert-editor stepwise questioning multi-agent method, in which the expert and the editor guide another agent to refine the summary by posing questions on different aspects of the content and providing targeted clues for revision. We conducted experiments on two representative long-document scientific datasets and evaluated the results through widely recognized automatic metrics. The results demonstrated the effectiveness of our method.
Maria Nefeli Paraskevopoulou, Tatiana Passali, Grigorios Tsoumakascs.CL
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.