mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

LeWiDi-2025 at NLPerspectives: Third Edition of the Learning with Disagreements Shared Task

arXiv 2510.08460 ↗First posted 9 Oct 2025cs.CLcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Many researchers have reached the conclusion that AI models should be trained to be aware of the possibility of variation and disagreement in human judgments, and evaluated as per their ability to recognize such variation. The LEWIDI series of shared tasks on Learning With Disagreements was established to promote this approach to training and evaluating AI models, by making suitable datasets more accessible and by developing evaluation methods. The third edition of the task builds on this goal by extending the LEWIDI benchmark to four datasets spanning paraphrase identification, irony detection, sarcasm detection, and natural language inference, with labeling schemes that include not only categorical judgments as in previous editions, but ordinal judgments as well. Another novelty is that we adopt two complementary paradigms to evaluate disagreement-aware systems: the soft-label approach, in which models predict population-level distributions of judgments, and the perspectivist approach, in which models predict the interpretations of individual annotators. Crucially, we moved beyond standard metrics such as cross-entropy, and tested new evaluation metrics for the two paradigms. The task attracted diverse participation, and the results provide insights into the strengths and limitations of methods to modeling variation. Together, these contributions strengthen LEWIDI as a framework and provide new resources, benchmarks, and findings to support the development of disagreement-aware technologies.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2025.

Builds on

14 of 56 references.

References · 14

  1. 2021Dealing with Disagreements: Looking Beyond the Majority Vote in Subjective Annotationscited by 314
  2. 2020What Can We Learn from Collective Human Opinions on Natural Language Inference Data?cited by 153
  3. 2017Deep learning from crowdscited by 105
  4. 2021Agreeing to Disagree: Annotating Offensive Language Datasets with Annotators' Disagreementcited by 72
  5. 2023SemEval-2023 Task 11: Learning With Disagreements (LeWiDi)cited by 52
  6. 2023What Comes Next? Evaluating Uncertainty in Neural Text Generators Against Human Production Variabilitycited by 51
  7. 2021ConvAbuse: Data, Analysis, and Benchmarks for Nuanced Abuse Detection in Conversational AIcited by 46
  8. 2024VariErr NLI: Separating Annotation Error from Human Label Variationcited by 42
  9. 2021Whose Opinions Matter? Perspective-aware Models to Identify Opinions of Hate Speech Victims in Abusive Language Detectioncited by 38
  10. 2025Spectrum Tuning: Post-Training for Distributional Coverage and In-Context Steerabilitycited by 20
  11. 2019A Crowdsourced Frame Disambiguation Corpus with Ambiguitycited by 16
  12. 2018Lexicosyntactic Inference in Neural Modelscited by 14
2 more
  1. 2025LPI-RIT at LeWiDi-2025: Improving Distributional Predictions via Metadata and Loss Reweighting with DisCocited by 2
  2. 2025Opt-ICL at LeWiDi-2025: Maximizing In-Context Signal from Rater Examples via Meta-Learningcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 9.

9 papers.