iLab at SemEval-2023 Task 11 Le-Wi-Di: Modelling Disagreement or Modelling Perspectives?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
There are two competing approaches for modelling annotator disagreement: distributional soft-labelling approaches (which aim to capture the level of disagreement) or modelling perspectives of individual annotators or groups thereof. We adapt a multi-task architecture -- which has previously shown success in modelling perspectives -- to evaluate its performance on the SEMEVAL Task 11. We do so by combining both approaches, i.e. predicting individual annotator perspectives as an interim step towards predicting annotator disagreement. Despite its previous success, we found that a multi-task approach performed poorly on datasets which contained distinct annotator opinions, suggesting that this approach may not always be suitable when modelling perspectives. Furthermore, our results explain that while strongly perspectivist approaches might not achieve state-of-the-art performance according to evaluation metrics used by distributional approaches, our approach allows for a more nuanced understanding of individual perspectives present in the data. We argue that perspectivist approaches are preferable because they enable decision makers to amplify minority views, and that it is important to re-evaluate metrics to reflect this goal.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 May 2023.
Builds on
25 of 48 references.
References · 25
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
- 2017GradNorm: Gradient Normalization for Adaptive Loss Balancing in Deep Multitask Networkscited by 834
- 2018Multi-Task Learning as Multi-Objective Optimizationcited by 821
- 2017An Overview of Multi-Task Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 803
- 2020AraBERT: Transformer-based Model for Arabic Language Understandingcited by 362
- 2021Dealing with Disagreements: Looking Beyond the Majority Vote in Subjective Annotationscited by 314
- 2019Lipstick on a Pig: Debiasing Methods Cover up Systematic Gender Biases in Word Embeddings But do not Remove Themcited by 268
- 2020Towards Debiasing Sentence Representationscited by 171
- 2020Directions in Abusive Language Training Data: Garbage In, Garbage Outcited by 140
- 2022The 'Problem' of Human Label Variation: On Ground Truth in Data, Modeling and Evaluationcited by 139
- 2021Toward a Perspectivist Turn in Ground Truthing for Predictive Computingcited by 130
13 more
- 2021On Releasing Annotator-Level Labels and Information in Datasetscited by 126
- 2022Jury Learning: Integrating Dissenting Voices into Machine Learning Modelscited by 118
- 2017Deep learning from crowdscited by 105
- 2021Agreeing to Disagree: Annotating Offensive Language Datasets with Annotators' Disagreementcited by 72
- 2022Theories of "Gender" in NLP Bias Researchcited by 62
- 2023SemEval-2023 Task 11: Learning With Disagreements (LeWiDi)cited by 52
- 2020Detecting Stance in Media on Global Warmingcited by 48
- 2021ConvAbuse: Data, Analysis, and Benchmarks for Nuanced Abuse Detection in Conversational AIcited by 46
- 2021Whose Opinions Matter? Perspective-aware Models to Identify Opinions of Hate Speech Victims in Abusive Language Detectioncited by 38
- 2021A Systematic Review of Reproducibility Research in Natural Language Processingcited by 34
- 2021Evaluating Debiasing Techniques for Intersectional Biasescited by 30
- 2022Optimising Equal Opportunity Fairness in Model Trainingcited by 22
- 2021Fairness-aware Class Imbalanced Learningcited by 19
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 4; 2025: 4.
10 papers.
- 2025Beyond Demographics: Fine-tuning Large Language Models to Predict Individuals' Subjective Text Perceptionscited by 33
- 2024Voices in a Crowd: Searching for Clusters of Unique Perspectivescited by 9
- 2024Corpus Considerations for Annotator Modeling and Scalingcited by 8
- 2024Re-examining Sexism and Misogyny Classification with Annotator Attitudescited by 8
- 2025Training and Evaluating with Human Label Variation: An Empirical Studycited by 8
- 2023Evaluating AI systems under uncertain ground truth: a case study in dermatologycited by 7
- 2023Architectural Sweet Spots for Modeling Human Label Variation by the Example of Argument Quality: It's Best to Relate Perspectives!cited by 5
- 2025Perspectives in Play: A Multi-Perspective Approach for More Inclusive NLP Systemscited by 4
- 2025The Impact of Annotator Personas on LLM Behavior Across the Perspectivism Spectrumcited by 3
- 2024Exploring the Influence of Label Aggregation on Minority Voices: Implications for Dataset Bias and Model Trainingcited by 1
- 2025The Impact of Annotator Personas on LLM Behavior Across the Perspectivism Spectrum23 Aug 2025
- 2025Perspectives in Play: A Multi-Perspective Approach for More Inclusive NLP Systems25 Jun 2025
- 2025Beyond Demographics: Fine-tuning Large Language Models to Predict Individuals' Subjective Text Perceptions28 Feb 2025
- 2025Training and Evaluating with Human Label Variation: An Empirical Study3 Feb 2025
- 2024Exploring the Influence of Label Aggregation on Minority Voices: Implications for Dataset Bias and Model Training5 Dec 2024
- 2024Re-examining Sexism and Misogyny Classification with Annotator Attitudes4 Oct 2024
- 2024Voices in a Crowd: Searching for Clusters of Unique Perspectives19 Jul 2024
- 2024Corpus Considerations for Annotator Modeling and Scaling2 Apr 2024
- 2023Architectural Sweet Spots for Modeling Human Label Variation by the Example of Argument Quality: It's Best to Relate Perspectives!6 Nov 2023
- 2023Evaluating AI systems under uncertain ground truth: a case study in dermatology5 Jul 2023