Voices in a Crowd: Searching for clusters of unique perspectives (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Proposed solutions aim to capture minority perspectives by either modelling annotator disagreements or grouping annotators based on shared metadata. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that trains models without encoding annotator metadata and creates clusters of similar opinions, that are called voices. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework captures minority perspectives based on demographic factors in two distinct datasets while also capturing majority perspectives. |
Similar Papers
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. |
Are We Modeling the Task or the Annotator? An Investigation of Annotator Bias in Natural Language Understanding Datasets (D19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Having only a few workers generate the majority of dataset examples raises concerns about data diversity . |
| Approach: | They perform a series of experiments to investigate annotator biases in recent NLU datasets . they find that models are able to recognize the most productive annotators . |
| Outcome: | The results show that models can recognize the most productive annotators and do not generalize well to examples from annotator that did not contribute to the training set. |
Proposal: From One-Fit-All to Perspective Aware Modeling (2025.acl-srw)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Variation in human annotation and human perspectives has drawn increasing attention in natural language processing research. |
| Approach: | They propose to use annotation formats that better capture granularity and uncertainty of individual judgments and annotation modeling that leverages socio-demographic features to better represent and predict underrepresented or minority perspectives. |
| Outcome: | The proposed tasks aim to advance natural language processing research towards more faithfully reflecting the diversity of human interpretation, enhancing both inclusiveness and fairness in language technologies. |
Proceedings of the First Workshop on Aggregating and Analysing Crowdsourced Annotations for NLP (D19-59)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | The first workshop on crowdsourcing for NLP is open to all . |
| Approach: | The first workshop on crowdsourcing annotations for NLP is held at the acl.com . the workshop will focus on methods for aggregating and analysing crowdsourced data for Nl-specific tasks. |
| Outcome: | The first workshop on crowdsourcing for NLP received 16 submissions and accepted 7 . the workshop will focus on ambiguous, subjective or ambiguity analysis of crowdsourced data . |
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%. |
Capturing Perspectives of Crowdsourced Annotators in Subjective Learning Tasks (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing approaches to label aggregation fail to capture subjective annotations and can lead to biases. |
| Approach: | They propose annotator-aware representations for text for subjective classification tasks that involve learning representations of annotators. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model improves on metrics that assess the performance on capturing individual annotators’ perspectives. |
Learning from Measurements in Crowdsourcing Models: Inferring Ground Truth from Diverse Annotation Types (C18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Annotated corpora are often assigned to internet workers whose judgments are reconciled by crowdsourcing models. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework for learning from rich prior knowledge to combine annotations with different structures. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model compares favorably with previous work and enables active sample selection to reduce annotation effort. |
Modeling Human Perspectives with Socio-Demographic Representations (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent studies show that human disagreement is widespread across many annotation tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose a method that jointly models annotator perspectives while learning socio-demographic representations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms concatenation-based methods in predicting annotator perspectives . it learns socio-demographic representations and analyzes how demographic factors relate to variation . |
Corpus Considerations for Annotator Modeling and Scaling (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent trends in natural language processing and annotation tasks emphasize individual perspectives . annotator models that rely on a single ground truth may disregard valuable minority perspectives omissions . |
| Approach: | They propose a composite embedding approach to investigate annotator modeling techniques . they show that the commonly used user token model consistently outperforms more complex models . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms more complex models on a given dataset. |
A Streamlined Method for Sourcing Discourse-level Argumentation Annotations from the Crowd (N19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for analyzing discourse-level argument annotations require expensive labor and data. |
| Approach: | They propose a method that breaks down a popular but complex discourse-level argument annotation scheme into a simple iterative procedure that can be applied even by untrained annotators. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method can be applied even by untrained annotators. |