# Bias-Corrected Ceilings of Emotion Predictability from Human Label Variation Based on Instance-Level Fano Bounds

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.15619 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.15619/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 9 of its 31 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Aug 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [GoEmotions: A Dataset of Fine-Grained Emotions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.00547/) (2020)
- [Dealing with Disagreements: Looking Beyond the Majority Vote in Subjective Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.05719/) (2021)
- [Human uncertainty makes classification more robust](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.07086/) (2019)
- [What Can We Learn from Collective Human Opinions on Natural Language Inference Data?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03532/) (2020)
- [Agreeing to Disagree: Annotating Offensive Language Datasets with Annotators' Disagreement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.13563/) (2021)
- [Stop Measuring Calibration When Humans Disagree](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.16133/) (2022)
- [SemEval-2023 Task 11: Learning With Disagreements (LeWiDi)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.14803/) (2023)
- [Is the Performance of My Deep Network Too Good to Be True? A Direct Approach to Estimating the Bayes Error in Binary Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.00395/) (2022)
- [Practical estimation of the optimal classification error with soft labels and calibration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.20761/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Emotion recognition from text keeps improving on benchmarks, yet whether an accuracy ceiling has been reached is seldom asked with discipline. Our aim is not to pin this ceiling to a single number, but to quantify how far it depends on finite annotation, estimator choice, annotation noise, and the evaluation protocol, and thereby to discipline how confidently saturation can be claimed. We propose Bias-corrected Affective Ceiling Estimation (BACE), an analysis framework that estimates a bias-corrected ceiling, separates irreducible from reducible error, and disciplines the resulting claims. An anchored Dirichlet-mixture empirical Bayes estimator, bracketed between plug-in and NSB, recovers the human-consensus distribution; an annotator split, a noise deconvolution, and a fixed claim gate then attribute error without circularity. Methodologically, unconstrained point estimates place reachability anywhere from 0.38 to 1.03, so saturation cannot be decided by any single estimator. Substantively, the only assertion passing the claim gate is that at least about 33% of a representative classifier's error on GoEmotions is irreducible, with the same pattern recurring on offensiveness and irony.