Understanding and quantifying the bias introduced by human annotation of data is a crucial problem for trustworthy supervised learning. Recently, a perspectivist trend has emerged in the NLP community, focusing on the inadequacy of previous aggregation schemes, which suppose the existence of a single ground truth. This assumption is particularly problematic for sensitive tasks involving subjective human judgments, such as toxicity detection. To address these issues, we propose a preliminary approach for bias discovery within human raters by exploring individual ratings for specific sensitive topics annotated in the texts. Our analysis's object focuses on the Jigsaw dataset, a collection of comments aiming at challenging online toxicity identification.
Bias Discovery Within Human Raters: A Case Study of the Jigsaw Dataset
Guidotti Riccardo;
2022
Abstract
Understanding and quantifying the bias introduced by human annotation of data is a crucial problem for trustworthy supervised learning. Recently, a perspectivist trend has emerged in the NLP community, focusing on the inadequacy of previous aggregation schemes, which suppose the existence of a single ground truth. This assumption is particularly problematic for sensitive tasks involving subjective human judgments, such as toxicity detection. To address these issues, we propose a preliminary approach for bias discovery within human raters by exploring individual ratings for specific sensitive topics annotated in the texts. Our analysis's object focuses on the Jigsaw dataset, a collection of comments aiming at challenging online toxicity identification.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.