Challenge: Recent studies indicate that learning from individual annotations outperforms learning from aggregated labels, though they require a considerable amount of annotation.
Approach: They propose to use a multi-head model to learn from disagreements in an active learning setting to identify annotators with a single head.
Outcome: The proposed model outperforms a single-head model in terms of uncertainty estimation and prediction while saving 70% of the annotation budget.

Similar Papers

Which Examples Should be Multiply Annotated? Active Learning When Annotators May Disagree (2023.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Disagreement in annotations is natural for humans, depending on background, identity, positionality . many active learning approaches focus on examples where model entropy and annotator entropicy are the most different.
Approach: They propose an active learning approach that focuses annotations on examples where model entropy and annotator entropic are the most different.
Outcome: The proposed approach reduces the number of annotations required by 24% on average across datasets.
Dealing with Disagreements: Looking Beyond the Majority Vote in Subjective Annotations (2022.tacl-1)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Annotators may systematically disagree with one another, reflecting their individual biases and values, especially in the case of subjective tasks such as detecting affect, aggression, and hate speech.
Approach: They propose to combine multi-annotator models with multi-task based approaches to resolve disagreements between annotations and derive single ground truth labels.
Outcome: The proposed model outperforms majority voting and averaging methods and estimates uncertainty in predictions.
Don’t waste a single annotation: improving single-label classifiers through soft labels (2023.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing methods for annotating data are limited by ambiguity and lack of context in data samples.
Approach: They challenge the traditional approach of annotating data by only providing a single label for each sample and annotator disagreement is discarded . instead, they use additional annotation information such as confidence, secondary label and disagreement to generate soft labels.
Outcome: The proposed method improves model performance and calibration on the hard label test set.
When the Majority is Wrong: Modeling Annotator Disagreement for Subjective Tasks (2023.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: a number of studies have questioned assumptions of majority vote aggregated labels.
Approach: They construct a model that predicts individual annotator ratings on potentially offensive text and combines this information with the predicted target group of the text to predict the ratings of target group members.
Outcome: The proposed model raises performance over baseline by 22% and 33% at predicting variance among annotators.
Disagreement Matters: Preserving Label Diversity by Jointly Modeling Item and Annotator Label Distributions with DisCo (2023.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: a recent study shows that annotator disagreement is common in supervised learning . a simple neural model that learns to predict annotators' labels is competitive with other models that do not model specific annotations.
Approach: They propose a neural model that learns to predict annotator distributions by aggregating over all annotators.
Outcome: The proposed model outperforms models that do not model specific annotators or do not learn label distribution learning.
Annotator-Centric Active Learning for Subjective NLP Tasks (2024.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Annotator-centric active learning addresses the high costs of collecting human annotations by strategically annotating the most informative samples.
Approach: They propose annotator-centric active learning which incorporates an annotation strategy following data sampling to approximate the full diversity of human judgments.
Outcome: The proposed approach improves data efficiency and performs well in annotator-centric evaluations.
Subjective Crowd Disagreements for Subjective Data: Uncovering Meaningful CrowdOpinion with Population-level Learning (2023.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Annotator disagreements are resolved before learning takes place, but researchers question the performance of a system when annotators disagree.
Approach: They propose a method that uses language features and label distributions to pool similar items into larger labels.
Outcome: The proposed method is based on five publicly available datasets with varying levels of disagreements on social media and in the wild using a dataset from Facebook.
Beyond Black & White: Leveraging Annotator Disagreement via Soft-Label Multi-Task Learning (2021.naacl-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Prior work shows that disagreement between annotators can be useful in training models.
Approach: They propose to use disagreements as an auxiliary task in a multi-task neural network to incorporate disagreements into models.
Outcome: The proposed method significantly improves performance on NLP tasks beyond the standard approach and prior work.
Not All Preference Pairs Are Created Equal: A Recipe for Annotation-Efficient Iterative Preference Learning (2024.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities to understand and generate human languages, supporting applications such as question answering, coding, and psychological counseling.
Approach: They propose strategies to save annotation budgets while achieving competitive or even better performances for iterative preference learning.
Outcome: The proposed methods save annotation budgets while achieving better performance.
You Are What You Annotate: Towards Better Models through Annotator Representations (2023.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Annotator disagreement is ubiquitous in natural language processing tasks.
Approach: They propose to model annotators' idiosyncrasies and account for their idioms by creating representations for each annotator and their annotations.
Outcome: The proposed model improves on an existing dataset with eight annotators with inherent disagreements while increasing model size by 1%.

What is GenGO?

GenGO is an NLP powered publication search system. It currenctly indexes 30k+ papers from ACL Anthology, and implements multi-aspect summarization, semantic search, and more!

Information

About
Limitations