mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Exploring the Influence of Label Aggregation on Minority Voices: Implications for Dataset Bias and Model Training

arXiv 2412.04025 ↗First posted 5 Dec 2024cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Resolving disagreement in manual annotation typically consists of removing unreliable annotators and using a label aggregation strategy such as majority vote or expert opinion to resolve disagreement. These may have the side-effect of silencing or under-representing minority but equally valid opinions. In this paper, we study the impact of standard label aggregation strategies on minority opinion representation in sexism detection. We investigate the quality and value of minority annotations, and then examine their effect on the class distributions in gold labels, as well as how this affects the behaviour of models trained on the resulting datasets. Finally, we discuss the potential biases introduced by each method and how they can be amplified by the models.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Dec 2024.

Builds on

17 of 30 references.

References · 17

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  3. 2021Dealing with Disagreements: Looking Beyond the Majority Vote in Subjective Annotationscited by 306
  4. 2019Predicting the Type and Target of Offensive Posts in Social Mediacited by 268
  5. 2018Large Scale Crowdsourcing and Characterization of Twitter Abusive Behaviorcited by 265
  6. 2021Annotators with Attitudes: How Annotator Beliefs And Identities Bias Toxic Language Detectioncited by 258
  7. 2021MultiVerS: Improving scientific claim verification with weak supervision and full-document contextcited by 140
  8. 2022The 'Problem' of Human Label Variation: On Ground Truth in Data, Modeling and Evaluationcited by 133
  9. 2021On Releasing Annotator-Level Labels and Information in Datasetscited by 123
  10. 2022Jury Learning: Integrating Dissenting Voices into Machine Learning Modelscited by 115
  11. 2022Stop Measuring Calibration When Humans Disagreecited by 70
  12. 2022A Systematic Study of Bias Amplificationcited by 65
5 more
  1. 2020"Call me sexist, but...": Revisiting Sexism Detection Using Psychological Scales and Adversarial Samplescited by 48
  2. 2023SemEval-2023 Task 10: Explainable Detection of Online Sexismcited by 48
  3. 2022To Aggregate or Not? Learning with Separate Noisy Labelscited by 29
  4. 2023iLab at SemEval-2023 Task 11 Le-Wi-Di: Modelling Disagreement or Modelling Perspectives?cited by 10
  5. 2022Noise Audits Improve Moral Foundation Classificationcited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.