mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Annotation Errors and NER: A Study with OntoNotes 5.0

arXiv 2406.19172 ↗First posted 27 Jun 2024cs.CLcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Named Entity Recognition (NER) is a well-studied problem in NLP. However, there is much less focus on studying NER datasets, compared to developing new NER models. In this paper, we employed three simple techniques to detect annotation errors in the OntoNotes 5.0 corpus for English NER, which is the largest available NER corpus for English. Our techniques corrected ~10% of the sentences in train/dev/test data. In terms of entity mentions, we corrected the span and/or type of ~8% of mentions in the dataset, while adding/deleting/splitting/merging a few more. These are large numbers of changes, considering the size of OntoNotes. We used three NER libraries to train, evaluate and compare the models trained with the original and the re-annotated datasets, which showed an average improvement of 1.23% in overall F-scores, with large (>10%) improvements for some of the entity types. While our annotation error detection methods are not exhaustive and there is some manual annotation effort involved, they are largely language agnostic and can be employed with other NER datasets, and other sequence labelling tasks.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Jun 2024.

Builds on

4 of 25 references.

References · 4

  1. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  2. 2020Stanza: A Python Natural Language Processing Toolkit for Many Human Languagescited by 723
  3. 2019CrossWeigh: Training Named Entity Tagger from Imperfect Annotationscited by 60
  4. 2019Named Entity Recognition -- Is there a glass ceiling?cited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

4 papers.