The example figure has a weird entry for the summary task. The input is: "summarize: state authorities dispatched emergency crews tuesday to survey the damage

The example figure has a weird entry for the summary task. The input is: "summarize: state authorities dispatched emergency crews tuesday to survey the damage after an onslaught of severe weather in mississippi..." And the output is: "six people hospitalized after a storm in attala county." That's quite a bad summary, no mention of "six" people in the original text, no mention of hospitalization. And "attala" county is too specific, a precision not present in the original text. If that's the result of their model, that's not good. If it's coming from the training set, it's an even bigger problem. I guess it's the result of the model, because some issues can be explained by correlations ("emergency" correlates with "hospital", "mississipi" correlates with "attala"). I'm wondering why they chose this example for the flagship figure of their paper.