Verifying Annotation Agreement without Multiple Experts: A Case Study with Gujarati SNACS

Maitrey Mehta, Vivek Srikumar

Findings: Linguistic Diversity Findings Paper

Session 4: Linguistic Diversity (Virtual Poster)
Conference Room: Pier 7&8
Conference Time: July 11, 11:00-12:30 (EDT) (America/Toronto)
Global Time: July 11, Session 4 (15:00-16:30 UTC)
Spotlight Session: Spotlight - Metropolitan West (Spotlight)
Conference Room: Metropolitan West
Conference Time: July 10, 19:00-21:00 (EDT) (America/Toronto)
Global Time: July 10, Spotlight Session (23:00-01:00 UTC)
Keywords: less-resourced languages, resources for less-resourced languages
TLDR: Good datasets are a foundation of NLP research, and form the basis for training and evaluating models of language use. While creating datasets, the standard practice is to verify the annotation consistency using a committee of human annotators. This norm assumes that multiple annotators are availa...
You can open the #paper-P5830 channel in a separate window.
Abstract: Good datasets are a foundation of NLP research, and form the basis for training and evaluating models of language use. While creating datasets, the standard practice is to verify the annotation consistency using a committee of human annotators. This norm assumes that multiple annotators are available, which is not the case for highly specialized tasks or low-resource languages. In this paper, we ask: Can we evaluate the quality of a dataset constructed by a single human annotator? To address this question, we propose four weak verifiers to help estimate dataset quality, and outline when each may be employed. We instantiate these strategies for the task of semantic analysis of adpositions in Gujarati, a low-resource language, and show that our weak verifiers concur with a double-annotation study. As an added contribution, we also release the first dataset with semantic annotations in Gujarati along with several model baselines.