Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Text mining›Natural Language Generation — Data-to-Text
Process / pipeline

Natural Language Generation — Data-to-Text

Natural Language Generation (NLG) · Also known as: NLG, data-to-text, text generation, Doğal Dil Üretimi (NLG)

Natural Language Generation (NLG) is the branch of natural language processing that automatically produces fluent, human-readable text from structured data, knowledge graphs, or semantic representations. Formalised in the classical pipeline by Reiter and Dale (2000) and surveyed comprehensively by Gatt and Krahmer (2018), NLG powers applications ranging from automated financial reporting and weather bulletins to data storytelling and conversational agents.

ScholarGate
  1. Process / pipeline
  2. v1
  3. 2 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Natural Language Generation
Automatic Text EvaluationGPT Fine-TuningMachine TranslationRetrieval-Augmented Gene…Sequence-to-Sequence Mod…Text SummarizationTransformerPrompt Engineering

When to use it

NLG is appropriate when you have structured data or a knowledge representation and need to communicate it as readable text at scale — for example, generating thousands of personalised reports, narrating dashboard data, or producing descriptions from a database. The input data structure must be well-defined. Quality evaluation requires either reference texts (for BLEU/BERTScore) or human raters. A minimum of around ten representative input-output pairs is needed to verify correctness; neural approaches require substantially larger training corpora. NLG is not suitable when the input is already unstructured text — that is a summarisation or paraphrasing task.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Converts large volumes of structured data into readable narrative automatically, enabling scalable reporting.
  • Classical pipeline approaches offer full interpretability and precise control over what is said and how.
  • Neural approaches learn complex input-to-text mappings from examples without hand-crafted grammar rules.
  • Applicable across domains — finance, weather, healthcare, sports — wherever structured data needs narration.
Limitations
  • Neural models can hallucinate — generating plausible-sounding text that contradicts the source data.
  • High-quality output requires either carefully engineered templates (classical) or large paired training corpora (neural).
  • Automatic metrics such as BLEU correlate imperfectly with human judgements of quality; human evaluation is costly.
  • Multilingual NLG remains demanding: surface realisation rules and morphological complexity vary substantially across languages.

Frequently asked

What is the difference between NLG and text summarisation?

Text summarisation takes existing text as input and produces a shorter text. NLG takes structured data — tables, databases, knowledge graphs — as input and produces text from scratch. The two overlap when the source is a structured representation of a document, but the canonical distinction is input type: unstructured text versus structured data.

How is the quality of generated text measured?

Automatic metrics such as BLEU (n-gram precision against reference texts) and BERTScore (contextual embedding similarity) are standard, but both correlate imperfectly with human judgements. For consequential applications, human evaluation of fluency, correctness, and relevance is recommended alongside automatic metrics.

When should I use a template-based system rather than a neural model?

Template-based systems are preferable when outputs must be strictly factually correct, when training data is scarce, or when full control over phrasing is required (e.g., regulatory documents). Neural models excel when large paired datasets are available and some variation in phrasing is acceptable.

What is hallucination in NLG and how can I detect it?

Hallucination occurs when a model generates text that is fluent but factually inconsistent with the source data. Detection approaches include comparing generated claims against the structured input using information-extraction tools, computing factual consistency scores, and human review. Hallucination is most common in neural models trained without explicit faithfulness constraints.

Sources

  1. Gatt, A. & Krahmer, E. (2018). Survey of the State of the Art in Natural Language Generation: Core Tasks, Applications and Evaluation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 61, 65-170. link ↗
  2. Reiter, E. & Dale, R. (2000). Building Natural Language Generation Systems. Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 9780521620369

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 1). Natural Language Generation (NLG). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/text-mining/natural-language-generation

Related methods

Automatic Text EvaluationGPT Fine-TuningMachine TranslationRetrieval-Augmented GenerationSequence-to-Sequence ModelText SummarizationTransformer

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Automatic Text EvaluationText mining↔ compare
  • GPT Fine-TuningDeep learning↔ compare
  • Machine TranslationText mining↔ compare
  • Retrieval-Augmented GenerationText mining↔ compare
  • Sequence-to-Sequence ModelDeep learning↔ compare
  • Text SummarizationText mining↔ compare
  • TransformerDeep learning↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Referenced by

Prompt Engineering

Similar methods

Question AnsweringText SummarizationInformation ExtractionSemantic ParsingMachine TranslationRelation ExtractionNamed Entity RecognitionFine-Tuned Text Summarization

Related reference concepts

Natural Language ProcessingInformation ExtractionInformation ExtractionNatural Language Processing in Clinical DocumentationMachine TranslationComputational Linguistics

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Natural Language Generation (Natural Language Generation (NLG)). Retrieved 2026-07-20 from https://scholargate.app/en/text-mining/natural-language-generation · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Reiter & Dale (classical pipeline, 2000); Gatt & Krahmer (modern survey, 2018)
Year
1970s (rule-based origins); 2000s (probabilistic); 2017+ (neural/transformer era)
Type
NLP generative task — structured data to natural language
Input
Structured data, knowledge graphs, or semantic representations
Output
Fluent, human-readable natural language text
Quality Metrics
BLEU, BERTScore, METEOR, human evaluation
Difficulty
3 / 5
Related methods
Automatic Text EvaluationGPT Fine-TuningMachine TranslationRetrieval-Augmented GenerationSequence-to-Sequence ModelText SummarizationTransformer
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account