Will Annotators Disagree? Identifying Subjectivity in Value-Laden Arguments (2025.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | aggregating multiple annotations into a single ground truth label may hide valuable insights into disagreement . |
| Approach: | They propose methods for identifying subjectivity in recognizing human values that motivate arguments. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods can help identify arguments that individuals may interpret differently. |
Similar Papers
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%. |
SOLAR: Towards Characterizing Subjectivity of Individuals through Modeling Value Conflicts and Trade-offs (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing studies suggest that Large Language Models can account for individual-level subjectivity, yet exploring whether LLMs can generate perspectives and reasoning that align well with a specific persona or demographic information has not been adequately studied. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that observes value conflicts and trade-offs in user-generated texts to better represent subjective ground of individuals. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework improves inference performance for users with limited data and in controversial situations. |
Architectural Sweet Spots for Modeling Human Label Variation by the Example of Argument Quality: It’s Best to Relate Perspectives! (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing approaches to subjectivity in natural language processing are subjective . authors argue that disagreement should not be regarded as a problem . |
| Approach: | They propose to account for subjective perspectives of individuals and objective concepts that build a common ground between annotators. |
| Outcome: | The proposed architectures increase the averaged annotator-individual F1-scores up to 43% over a majority-label model. |
The Perspectivist Paradigm Shift: Assumptions and Challenges of Capturing Human Labels (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a line of recent work has illustrated that annotators disagree for many reasons . capturing disagreements can improve model performance and calibration, authors argue . |
| Approach: | They propose a new paradigm shift in data labeling for machine learning that challenges annotator disagreement by treating disagreement as a valuable source of information. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approaches challenge annotator disagreement and provide recommendations for the data labeling pipeline and avenues for future research. |
Agreeing to Disagree: Annotating Offensive Language Datasets with Annotators’ Disagreement (2021.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | supervised learning is a key component of offensive language detection, but there is little attention given to the quality of annotated data. |
| Approach: | They propose to examine the level of agreement among annotators while selecting data to create offensive language datasets, a task involving a high level of subjectivity. |
| Outcome: | The proposed datasets show that annotators' agreement has a strong effect on classifiers performance and robustness. |
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. |
Searching for the X-Factor: Exploring Corpus Subjectivity for Word Embeddings (P18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing word embedding methods for natural language processing are limited in their ability to produce dense word embeds. |
| Approach: | They propose a word embedding SentiVec which is infused with sentiment information from a lexical resource and outperforms baselines on subjectivity-sensitive tasks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed word embedding SentiVec outperforms baselines on subjectivity-sensitive tasks. |
GRASP: A Disagreement Analysis Framework to Assess Group Associations in Perspectives (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Vinodkumar Prabhakaran, Christopher Homan, Lora Aroyo, Aida Mostafazadeh Davani, Alicia Parrish, Alex Taylor, Mark Diaz, Ding Wang, Gregory Serapio-García
| Challenge: | Recent work shows that ignoring rater subjectivity is problematic within specific tasks and for specific subgroups. |
| Approach: | They propose a disagreement analysis framework to measure group association in perspectives among different rater subgroups. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework reveals specific rater groups that have significantly different perspectives than others on certain tasks and helps identify demographic axes that are crucial to consider in specific task contexts. |
Learning Subjective Label Distributions via Sociocultural Descriptors (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Conventional approaches aggregate annotator judgements (labels), ignoring minority perspectives, and overlooking the influence of sociocultural context behind such annotations. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework where subjectivity in binary labels is modeled as an empirical distribution accounting for the variation in annotators through human values extracted from sociocultural descriptors using a language model. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model yields well-calibrated toxicity distribution predictions across binary toxicity labels, which are further used for majority label prediction across cultural subgroups. |
D3CODE: Disentangling Disagreements in Data across Cultures on Offensiveness Detection and Evaluation (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent studies on annotator subjectivity focus on Western contexts and only document differences across age, gender, or racial groups. |
| Approach: | They propose a large-scale cross-cultural dataset of parallel annotations for offensive language in over 4.5K English sentences annotated by a pool of more than 4k annotators from 21 countries. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset captures annotators’ moral values along six moral foundations: care, equality, proportionality, authority, loyalty, and purity. |