Capturing Perspectives of Crowdsourced Annotators in Subjective Learning Tasks
Authors:
Negar Mokhberian,
Myrl G. Marmarelis,
Frederic R. Hopp,
Valerio Basile,
Fred Morstatter,
Kristina Lerman
Abstract:
Supervised classification heavily depends on datasets annotated by humans. However, in subjective tasks such as toxicity classification, these annotations often exhibit low agreement among raters. Annotations have commonly been aggregated by employing methods like majority voting to determine a single ground truth label. In subjective tasks, aggregating labels will result in biased labeling and, c…
▽ More
Supervised classification heavily depends on datasets annotated by humans. However, in subjective tasks such as toxicity classification, these annotations often exhibit low agreement among raters. Annotations have commonly been aggregated by employing methods like majority voting to determine a single ground truth label. In subjective tasks, aggregating labels will result in biased labeling and, consequently, biased models that can overlook minority opinions. Previous studies have shed light on the pitfalls of label aggregation and have introduced a handful of practical approaches to tackle this issue. Recently proposed multi-annotator models, which predict labels individually per annotator, are vulnerable to under-determination for annotators with few samples. This problem is exacerbated in crowdsourced datasets. In this work, we propose \textbf{Annotator Aware Representations for Texts (AART)} for subjective classification tasks. Our approach involves learning representations of annotators, allowing for exploration of annotation behaviors. We show the improvement of our method on metrics that assess the performance on capturing individual annotators' perspectives. Additionally, we demonstrate fairness metrics to evaluate our model's equability of performance for marginalized annotators compared to others.
△ Less
Submitted 16 May, 2024; v1 submitted 16 November, 2023;
originally announced November 2023.
Noise Audits Improve Moral Foundation Classification
Authors:
Negar Mokhberian,
Frederic R. Hopp,
Bahareh Harandizadeh,
Fred Morstatter,
Kristina Lerman
Abstract:
Morality plays an important role in culture, identity, and emotion. Recent advances in natural language processing have shown that it is possible to classify moral values expressed in text at scale. Morality classification relies on human annotators to label the moral expressions in text, which provides training data to achieve state-of-the-art performance. However, these annotations are inherentl…
▽ More
Morality plays an important role in culture, identity, and emotion. Recent advances in natural language processing have shown that it is possible to classify moral values expressed in text at scale. Morality classification relies on human annotators to label the moral expressions in text, which provides training data to achieve state-of-the-art performance. However, these annotations are inherently subjective and some of the instances are hard to classify, resulting in noisy annotations due to error or lack of agreement. The presence of noise in training data harms the classifier's ability to accurately recognize moral foundations from text. We propose two metrics to audit the noise of annotations. The first metric is entropy of instance labels, which is a proxy measure of annotator disagreement about how the instance should be labeled. The second metric is the silhouette coefficient of a label assigned by an annotator to an instance. This metric leverages the idea that instances with the same label should have similar latent representations, and deviations from collective judgments are indicative of errors. Our experiments on three widely used moral foundations datasets show that removing noisy annotations based on the proposed metrics improves classification performance.
△ Less
Submitted 13 October, 2022;
originally announced October 2022.
