Improving Human-Labeled Data through Dynamic Automatic Conflict Resolution
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper develops and implements a scalable methodology for (a) estimating the noisiness of labels produced by a typical crowdsourcing semantic annotation task, and (b) reducing the resulting error of the labeling process by as much as 20-30% in comparison to other common labeling strategies. Importantly, this new approach to the labeling process, which we name Dynamic Automatic Conflict Resolution (DACR), does not require a ground truth dataset and is instead based on inter-project annotation inconsistencies. This makes DACR not only more accurate but also available to a broad range of labeling tasks. In what follows we present results from a text classification task performed at scale for a commercial personal assistant, and evaluate the inherent ambiguity uncovered by this annotation strategy as compared to other common labeling strategies.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 8 Dec 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 1; 2023: 1.
4 papers.
- 2021What Ingredients Make for an Effective Crowdsourcing Protocol for Difficult NLU Data Collection Tasks?cited by 23
- 2022Toward More Effective Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 10
- 2023Leveraging Human Feedback to Scale Educational Datasets: Combining Crowdworkers and Comparative Judgementcited by 3
- 2021Dynamic Human Evaluation for Relative Model Comparisonscited by 2
- 2023Leveraging Human Feedback to Scale Educational Datasets: Combining Crowdworkers and Comparative Judgement22 May 2023
- 2022Toward More Effective Human Evaluation for Machine Translation11 Apr 2022
- 2021Dynamic Human Evaluation for Relative Model Comparisons15 Dec 2021
- 2021What Ingredients Make for an Effective Crowdsourcing Protocol for Difficult NLU Data Collection Tasks?1 Jun 2021