mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Human-in-the-Loop Synthetic Text Data Inspection with Provenance Tracking

arXiv 2404.18881 ↗First posted 29 Apr 2024cs.HC cs.LG cs.SEcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Data augmentation techniques apply transformations to existing texts to generate additional data. The transformations may produce low-quality texts, where the meaning of the text is changed and the text may even be mangled beyond human comprehension. Analyzing the synthetically generated texts and their corresponding labels is slow and demanding. To winnow out texts with incorrect labels, we develop INSPECTOR, a human-in-the-loop data inspection technique. INSPECTOR combines the strengths of provenance tracking techniques with assistive labeling. INSPECTOR allows users to group related texts by their transformation provenance, i.e., the transformations applied to the original text, or feature provenance, the linguistic features of the original text. For assistive labeling, INSPECTOR computes metrics that approximate data quality, and allows users to compare the corresponding label of each text against the predictions of a large language model. In a user study, INSPECTOR increases the number of texts with correct labels identified by 3X on a sentiment analysis task and by 4X on a hate speech detection task. The participants found grouping the synthetically generated texts by their common transformation to be the most useful technique. Surprisingly, grouping texts by common linguistic features was perceived to be unhelpful. Contrary to prior work, our study finds that no single technique obviates the need for human inspection effort. This validates the design of INSPECTOR which combines both analysis of data provenance and assistive labeling to reduce human inspection effort.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Apr 2024.

Builds on

20 of 45 references.

References · 20

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 1,006
  3. 2023ChatGPT Outperforms Crowd-Workers for Text-Annotation Taskscited by 870
  4. 2019EDA: Easy Data Augmentation Techniques for Boosting Performance on Text Classification Taskscited by 807
  5. 2021Dynabench: Rethinking Benchmarking in NLPcited by 459
  6. 2020TweetEval: Unified Benchmark and Comparative Evaluation for Tweet Classificationcited by 417
  7. 2019Confident Learning: Estimating Uncertainty in Dataset Labelscited by 413
  8. 2020Does the Whole Exceed its Parts? The Effect of AI Explanations on Complementary Team Performancecited by 399
  9. 2018Black-box Generation of Adversarial Text Sequences to Evade Deep Learning Classifierscited by 345
  10. 2019The What-If Tool: Interactive Probing of Machine Learning Modelscited by 207
  11. 2021Want To Reduce Labeling Cost? GPT-3 Can Helpcited by 196
  12. 2018On Human Predictions with Explanations and Predictions of Machine Learning Models: A Case Study on Deception Detectioncited by 159
8 more
  1. 2020Challenges in Deploying Machine Learning: a Survey of Case Studiescited by 152
  2. 2021AEDA: An Easier Data Augmentation Technique for Text Classificationcited by 67
  3. 2023Zeno: An Interactive Framework for Behavioral Evaluation of Machine Learningcited by 33
  4. 2022Whose AI Dream? In search of the aspiration in data annotationcited by 24
  5. 2021Increasing the Speed and Accuracy of Data LabelingThrough an AI Assisted Interfacecited by 21
  6. 2021TagRuler: Interactive Tool for Span-Level Data Programming by Demonstrationcited by 4
  7. 2020Data Programming by Demonstration: A Framework for Interactively Learning Labeling Functionscited by 3
  8. 2022Sibylvariant Transformations for Robust Text Classificationcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 4.

5 papers.