The Promises and Pitfalls of LLM Annotations in Dataset Labeling: a Case Study on Media Bias Detection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.11081v1
• Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2024 14:14:36 GMT
• Title: The Promises and Pitfalls of LLM Annotations in Dataset Labeling: a Case Study on Media Bias Detection
• Authors: Tomas Horych, Christoph Mandl, Terry Ruas, Andre Greiner-Petter, Bela Gipp, Akiko Aizawa, Timo Spinde,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) can be used to automate the annotation process. This study investigates whether LLMs are viable for annotating the complex task of media bias detection. We create annolexical, the first large-scale dataset for media bias classification.
• Score: 23.378592856800168
• License:
• Abstract: High annotation costs from hiring or crowdsourcing complicate the creation of large, high-quality datasets needed for training reliable text classifiers. Recent research suggests using Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate the annotation process, reducing these costs while maintaining data quality. LLMs have shown promising results in annotating downstream tasks like hate speech detection and political framing. Building on the success in these areas, this study investigates whether LLMs are viable for annotating the complex task of media bias detection and whether a downstream media bias classifier can be trained on such data. We create annolexical, the first large-scale dataset for media bias classification with over 48000 synthetically annotated examples. Our classifier, fine-tuned on this dataset, surpasses all of the annotator LLMs by 5-9 percent in Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) and performs close to or outperforms the model trained on human-labeled data when evaluated on two media bias benchmark datasets (BABE and BASIL). This study demonstrates how our approach significantly reduces the cost of dataset creation in the media bias domain and, by extension, the development of classifiers, while our subsequent behavioral stress-testing reveals some of its current limitations and trade-offs.

Related papers

• Star-Agents: Automatic Data Optimization with LLM Agents for Instruction Tuning [71.2981957820888]
  We propose a novel Star-Agents framework, which automates the enhancement of data quality across datasets. The framework initially generates diverse instruction data with multiple LLM agents through a bespoke sampling method. The generated data undergo a rigorous evaluation using a dual-model method that assesses both difficulty and quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-21T02:30:53Z)
• SELF-GUIDE: Better Task-Specific Instruction Following via Self-Synthetic Finetuning [70.21358720599821]
  Large language models (LLMs) hold the promise of solving diverse tasks when provided with appropriate natural language prompts. We propose SELF-GUIDE, a multi-stage mechanism in which we synthesize task-specific input-output pairs from the student LLM. We report an absolute improvement of approximately 15% for classification tasks and 18% for generation tasks in the benchmark's metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T04:41:58Z)
• Entropy Law: The Story Behind Data Compression and LLM Performance [115.70395740286422]
  We find that model performance is negatively correlated to the compression ratio of training data, which usually yields a lower training loss. Based on the findings of the entropy law, we propose a quite efficient and universal data selection method. We also present an interesting application of entropy law that can detect potential performance risks at the beginning of model training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-09T08:14:29Z)
• Enhancing Text Classification through LLM-Driven Active Learning and Human Annotation [2.0411082897313984]
  This study introduces a novel methodology that integrates human annotators and Large Language Models. The proposed framework integrates human annotation with the output of LLMs, depending on the model uncertainty levels. The empirical results show a substantial decrease in the costs associated with data annotation while either maintaining or improving model accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T21:45:48Z)
• Investigating Annotator Bias in Large Language Models for Hate Speech Detection [5.589665886212444]
  This paper delves into the biases present in Large Language Models (LLMs) when annotating hate speech data. Specifically targeting highly vulnerable groups within these categories, we analyze annotator biases. We introduce our custom hate speech detection dataset, HateBiasNet, to conduct this research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T00:18:31Z)
• Multi-News+: Cost-efficient Dataset Cleansing via LLM-based Data Annotation [9.497148303350697]
  We present a case study that extends the application of LLM-based data annotation to enhance the quality of existing datasets through a cleansing strategy. Specifically, we leverage approaches such as chain-of-thought and majority voting to imitate human annotation and classify unrelated documents from the Multi-News dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-15T11:36:10Z)
• ChatGPT Based Data Augmentation for Improved Parameter-Efficient Debiasing of LLMs [65.9625653425636]
  Large Language models (LLMs) exhibit harmful social biases. This work introduces a novel approach utilizing ChatGPT to generate synthetic training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T01:28:48Z)
• How to Train Data-Efficient LLMs [56.41105687693619]
  We study data-efficient approaches for pre-training language models (LLMs) We find that Ask-LLM and Density sampling are the best methods in their respective categories. In our comparison of 19 samplers, involving hundreds of evaluation tasks and pre-training runs, we find that Ask-LLM and Density are the best methods in their respective categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-15T02:27:57Z)
• On Inter-dataset Code Duplication and Data Leakage in Large Language Models [4.148857672591562]
  This paper explores the phenomenon of inter-dataset code duplication and its impact on evaluating large language models (LLMs) Our findings reveal a potential threat to the evaluation of LLMs across multiple SE tasks, stemming from the inter-dataset code duplication phenomenon. We provide evidence that open-source models could be affected by inter-dataset duplication.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-15T19:46:40Z)
• Temporal Output Discrepancy for Loss Estimation-based Active Learning [65.93767110342502]
  We present a novel deep active learning approach that queries the oracle for data annotation when the unlabeled sample is believed to incorporate high loss. Our approach achieves superior performances than the state-of-the-art active learning methods on image classification and semantic segmentation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-20T19:29:37Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.