Building Better Datasets: Seven Recommendations for Responsible Design from Dataset Creators
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The increasing demand for high-quality datasets in machine learning has raised concerns about the ethical and responsible creation of these datasets. Dataset creators play a crucial role in developing responsible practices, yet their perspectives and expertise have not yet been highlighted in the current literature. In this paper, we bridge this gap by presenting insights from a qualitative study that included interviewing 18 leading dataset creators about the current state of the field. We shed light on the challenges and considerations faced by dataset creators, and our findings underscore the potential for deeper collaboration, knowledge sharing, and collective development. Through a close analysis of their perspectives, we share seven central recommendations for improving responsible dataset creation, including issues such as data quality, documentation, privacy and consent, and how to mitigate potential harms from unintended use cases. By fostering critical reflection and sharing the experiences of dataset creators, we aim to promote responsible dataset creation practices and develop a nuanced understanding of this crucial but often undervalued aspect of machine learning research.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 60 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Aug 2024.
Builds on
24 of 60 references.
References · 24
- 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,854
- 2022LAION-5B: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text modelscited by 4,131
- 2019SuperGLUE: A Stickier Benchmark for General-Purpose Language Understanding Systemscited by 1,718
- 2021LAION-400M: Open Dataset of CLIP-Filtered 400 Million Image-Text Pairscited by 1,544
- 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,538
- 2015Image-based Recommendations on Styles and Substitutescited by 702
- 2020TweetEval: Unified Benchmark and Comparative Evaluation for Tweet Classificationcited by 414
- 2018WiC: the Word-in-Context Dataset for Evaluating Context-Sensitive Meaning Representationscited by 370
- 2021Multimodal datasets: misogyny, pornography, and malignant stereotypescited by 326
- 2020Data and its (dis)contents: A survey of dataset development and use in machine learning researchcited by 259
- 2020Large image datasets: A pyrrhic win for computer vision?cited by 237
12 more
- 2019A Framework for Understanding Sources of Harm throughout the Machine Learning Life Cyclecited by 192
- 2019Towards Fairer Datasets: Filtering and Balancing the Distribution of the People Subtree in the ImageNet Hierarchycited by 156
- 2018A Survey on Data Collection for Machine Learning: a Big Data -- AI Integration Perspectivecited by 111
- 2021Reduced, Reused and Recycled: The Life of a Dataset in Machine Learning Researchcited by 100
- 2018The Dataset Nutrition Label: A Framework To Drive Higher Data Quality Standardscited by 97
- 2019Garbage In, Garbage Out? Do Machine Learning Application Papers in Social Computing Report Where Human-Labeled Training Data Comes From?cited by 64
- 2018Diversity in Machine Learningcited by 48
- 2022Open High-Resolution Satellite Imagery: The WorldStrat Dataset -- With Application to Super-Resolutioncited by 40
- 2022Dislocated Accountabilities in the AI Supply Chain: Modularity and Developers' Notions of Responsibilitycited by 33
- 2023Democratising AI: Multiple Meanings, Goals, and Methodscited by 29
- 2022The Dataset Nutrition Label (2nd Gen): Leveraging Context to Mitigate Harms in Artificial Intelligencecited by 26
- 2021A Framework for Deprecating Datasets: Standardizing Documentation, Identification, and Communicationcited by 18
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 1.
5 papers.
- 2025Can We Trust AI Benchmarks? An Interdisciplinary Review of Current Issues in AI Evaluationcited by 57
- 2025Whose Personae? Synthetic Persona Experiments in LLM Research and Pathways to Transparencycited by 14
- 2025EvalCards: A Framework for Standardized Evaluation Reportingcited by 4
- 2026LARD 2.0: Enhanced Datasets and Benchmarking for Autonomous Landing Systemscited by 4
- 2025ConspirED: A Dataset for Cognitive Traits of Conspiracy Theories and Large Language Model Safetycited by 1
- 2026LARD 2.0: Enhanced Datasets and Benchmarking for Autonomous Landing Systems23 Mar 2026
- 2025Whose Personae? Synthetic Persona Experiments in LLM Research and Pathways to Transparency29 Nov 2025
- 2025EvalCards: A Framework for Standardized Evaluation Reporting5 Nov 2025
- 2025ConspirED: A Dataset for Cognitive Traits of Conspiracy Theories and Large Language Model Safety28 Aug 2025
- 2025Can We Trust AI Benchmarks? An Interdisciplinary Review of Current Issues in AI Evaluation10 Feb 2025