<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="W97-0705">
  <Title>I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I</Title>
  <Section position="2" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="abstr">
    <SectionTitle>
Abstract
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> For the SERAPHIN project, we set up two assessment protocols m order to be able to more accurately assess the * quahty of abstracts - the FAN protocol and the MLffCE protocol, for which we provide the results The FAH protocol assesses the legibdtty of an abstract, independently from the source text The MLUCE protocol ls designed to allow users of automatic abstracts to assess then&amp;quot; quality These protocols were applied to a corpus of 27 texts which vaned m length from between three and twelve pages These texts were randomly chosen from EDF archives They include both sclenUfic and general press articles, extracts from books, and internal EDP notes The results of the FAlq protocol demonstrate the &amp;fficulty of using surface lmgmsuc m&amp;cators to assess the. quality of an abstract, the results of the MLUCE protocol illustrate the importance of user</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>