mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Clean or Annotate: How to Spend a Limited Data Collection Budget

arXiv 2110.08355 ↗First posted 15 Oct 2021cs.CLcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Crowdsourcing platforms are often used to collect datasets for training machine learning models, despite higher levels of inaccurate labeling compared to expert labeling. There are two common strategies to manage the impact of such noise. The first involves aggregating redundant annotations, but comes at the expense of labeling substantially fewer examples. Secondly, prior works have also considered using the entire annotation budget to label as many examples as possible and subsequently apply denoising algorithms to implicitly clean the dataset. We find a middle ground and propose an approach which reserves a fraction of annotations to explicitly clean up highly probable error samples to optimize the annotation process. In particular, we allocate a large portion of the labeling budget to form an initial dataset used to train a model. This model is then used to identify specific examples that appear most likely to be incorrect, which we spend the remaining budget to relabel. Experiments across three model variations and four natural language processing tasks show our approach outperforms or matches both label aggregation and advanced denoising methods designed to handle noisy labels when allocated the same finite annotation budget.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 40 of its 69 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Oct 2021.

Builds on

40 of 69 references.

References · 40

  1. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  2. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,441
  3. 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,243
  4. 2017Prototypical Networks for Few-shot Learningcited by 3,001
  5. 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,665
  6. 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,157
  7. 2015A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inferencecited by 1,837
  8. 2016Understanding deep learning requires rethinking generalizationcited by 1,657
  9. 2018Co-teaching: Robust Training of Deep Neural Networks with Extremely Noisy Labelscited by 1,053
  10. 2018Generalized Cross Entropy Loss for Training Deep Neural Networks with Noisy Labelscited by 994
  11. 2017A Closer Look at Memorization in Deep Networkscited by 936
  12. 2016Bag of Tricks for Efficient Text Classificationcited by 869
28 more
  1. 2020DivideMix: Learning with Noisy Labels as Semi-supervised Learningcited by 691
  2. 2016Making Deep Neural Networks Robust to Label Noise: a Loss Correction Approachcited by 663
  3. 2017MentorNet: Learning Data-Driven Curriculum for Very Deep Neural Networks on Corrupted Labelscited by 652
  4. 2019Deep Batch Active Learning by Diverse, Uncertain Gradient Lower Boundscited by 602
  5. 2020GoEmotions: A Dataset of Fine-Grained Emotionscited by 479
  6. 2017Robust Loss Functions under Label Noise for Deep Neural Networkscited by 441
  7. 2020Dataset Cartography: Mapping and Diagnosing Datasets with Training Dynamicscited by 423
  8. 2019How does Disagreement Help Generalization against Label Corruption?cited by 390
  9. 2019Social Bias Frames: Reasoning about Social and Power Implications of Languagecited by 377
  10. 2016NewsQA: A Machine Comprehension Datasetcited by 330
  11. 2019Unsupervised Label Noise Modeling and Loss Correctioncited by 327
  12. 2014Training Deep Neural Networks on Noisy Labels with Bootstrappingcited by 322
  13. 2018Joint Optimization Framework for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 293
  14. 2020Identifying Mislabeled Data using the Area Under the Margin Rankingcited by 259
  15. 2017CleanNet: Transfer Learning for Scalable Image Classifier Training with Label Noisecited by 181
  16. 2019Learning From Noisy Labels By Regularized Estimation Of Annotator Confusioncited by 126
  17. 2017Deep learning from crowdscited by 105
  18. 2017Who Said What: Modeling Individual Labelers Improves Classificationcited by 77
  19. 2018Practical Obstacles to Deploying Active Learningcited by 68
  20. 2020DynaSent: A Dynamic Benchmark for Sentiment Analysiscited by 63
  21. 2017Learning From Noisy Singly-labeled Datacited by 50
  22. 2019Uncertain Natural Language Inferencecited by 35
  23. 2021Learning with Different Amounts of Annotation: From Zero to Many Labelscited by 28
  24. 2021Pre-train or Annotate? Domain Adaptation with a Constrained Budgetcited by 27
  25. 2019An Effective Label Noise Model for DNN Text Classificationcited by 22
  26. 2019Analysis of Automatic Annotation Suggestions for Hard Discourse-Level Tasks in Expert Domainscited by 11
  27. 2019Learning with Noisy Labels for Sentence-level Sentiment Classificationcited by 11
  28. 2016Achieving Budget-optimality with Adaptive Schemes in Crowdsourcingcited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 4; 2024: 1; 2025: 3.

10 papers.