Evolutionary Data Measures: Understanding the Difficulty of Text Classification Tasks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Classification tasks are usually analysed and improved through new model architectures or hyperparameter optimisation but the underlying properties of datasets are discovered on an ad-hoc basis as errors occur. However, understanding the properties of the data is crucial in perfecting models. In this paper we analyse exactly which characteristics of a dataset best determine how difficult that dataset is for the task of text classification. We then propose an intuitive measure of difficulty for text classification datasets which is simple and fast to calculate. We show that this measure generalises to unseen data by comparing it to state-of-the-art datasets and results. This measure can be used to analyse the precise source of errors in a dataset and allows fast estimation of how difficult a dataset is to learn. We searched for this measure by training 12 classical and neural network based models on 78 real-world datasets, then use a genetic algorithm to discover the best measure of difficulty. Our difficulty-calculating code ( https://github.com/Wluper/edm ) and datasets ( http://data.wluper.com ) are publicly available.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 5 Nov 2018.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 2; 2023: 1; 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.
11 papers.
- 2021Not All Negatives are Equal: Label-Aware Contrastive Loss for Fine-grained Text Classificationcited by 43
- 2025SVLTA: Benchmarking Vision-Language Temporal Alignment via Synthetic Video Situationcited by 4
- 2021Quantifying the Task-Specific Information in Text-Based Classificationscited by 3
- 2022What can we Learn by Predicting Accuracy?cited by 3
- 2025Small Language Models in the Real World: Insights from Industrial Text Classificationcited by 2
- 2022Text Characterization Toolkitcited by 0
- 2023Identifying Semantically Difficult Samples to Improve Text Classificationcited by 0
- 2024Beyond RMSE and MAE: Introducing EAUC to unmask hidden bias and unfairness in dyadic regression modelscited by 0
- 2024SensoryT5: Infusing Sensorimotor Norms into T5 for Enhanced Fine-grained Emotion Classificationcited by 0
- 2025Assessing the Impact of the Quality of Textual Data on Feature Representation and Machine Learning Modelscited by 0
- 2026From Errors to Rules: Iterative Prompt Optimization for Text Classificationcited by 0
- 2026From Errors to Rules: Iterative Prompt Optimization for Text Classification15 Jun 2026
- 2025Small Language Models in the Real World: Insights from Industrial Text Classification21 May 2025
- 2025SVLTA: Benchmarking Vision-Language Temporal Alignment via Synthetic Video Situation8 Apr 2025
- 2025Assessing the Impact of the Quality of Textual Data on Feature Representation and Machine Learning Models12 Feb 2025
- 2024SensoryT5: Infusing Sensorimotor Norms into T5 for Enhanced Fine-grained Emotion Classification22 Mar 2024
- 2024Beyond RMSE and MAE: Introducing EAUC to unmask hidden bias and unfairness in dyadic regression models19 Jan 2024
- 2023Identifying Semantically Difficult Samples to Improve Text Classification13 Feb 2023
- 2022Text Characterization Toolkit4 Oct 2022
- 2022What can we Learn by Predicting Accuracy?2 Aug 2022
- 2021Quantifying the Task-Specific Information in Text-Based Classifications17 Oct 2021
- 2021Not All Negatives are Equal: Label-Aware Contrastive Loss for Fine-grained Text Classification12 Sep 2021