mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Generalizable Error Modeling for Human Data Annotation: Evidence From an Industry-Scale Search Data Annotation Program

arXiv 2310.05286 ↗First posted 8 Oct 2023cs.LG cs.AI cs.HCcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) systems rely heavily on human-annotated data for training and evaluation. A major challenge in this context is the occurrence of annotation errors, as their effects can degrade model performance. This paper presents a predictive error model trained to detect potential errors in search relevance annotation tasks for three industry-scale ML applications (music streaming, video streaming, and mobile apps). Drawing on real-world data from an extensive search relevance annotation program, we demonstrate that errors can be predicted with moderate model performance (AUC=0.65-0.75) and that model performance generalizes well across applications (i.e., a global, task-agnostic model performs on par with task-specific models). In contrast to past research, which has often focused on predicting annotation labels from task-specific features, our model is trained to predict errors directly from a combination of task features and behavioral features derived from the annotation process, in order to achieve a high degree of generalizability. We demonstrate the usefulness of the model in the context of auditing, where prioritizing tasks with high predicted error probabilities considerably increases the amount of corrected annotation errors (e.g., 40% efficiency gains for the music streaming application). These results highlight that behavioral error detection models can yield considerable improvements in the efficiency and quality of data annotation processes. Our findings reveal critical insights into effective error management in the data annotation process, thereby contributing to the broader field of human-in-the-loop ML.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Oct 2023.

Builds on

14 of 30 references.

References · 14

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  3. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,120
  4. 2021Tabular Data: Deep Learning is Not All You Needcited by 530
  5. 2021Pervasive Label Errors in Test Sets Destabilize Machine Learning Benchmarkscited by 388
  6. 2021MultiVerS: Improving scientific claim verification with weak supervision and full-document contextcited by 140
  7. 2020TACRED Revisited: A Thorough Evaluation of the TACRED Relation Extraction Taskcited by 96
  8. 2022Annotation Error Detection: Analyzing the Past and Present for a More Coherent Futurecited by 45
  9. 2021Active label cleaning for improved dataset quality under resource constraintscited by 44
  10. 2020Modeling and mitigating human annotation errors to design efficient stream processing systems with human-in-the-loop machine learningcited by 21
  11. 2019Sentiment analysis is not solved! Assessing and probing sentiment classificationcited by 14
  12. 2020Best Practices for Managing Data Annotation Projectscited by 12
2 more
  1. 2019Predicting Annotation Difficulty to Improve Task Routing and Model Performance for Biomedical Information Extractioncited by 9
  2. 2016A Characterization of Prediction Errorscited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.