paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

Agree or Disagree: Predicting Judgments on Nuanced Assertions

2018-06-01 · SEMEVAL 2018 6 · Michael Wojatzki, Torsten Zesch, Saif Mohammad, Svetlana Kiritchenko

Being able to predict whether people agree or disagree with an assertion (i.e. an explicit, self-contained statement) has several applications ranging from predicting how many people will like or dislike a social media post to classifying posts based on whether they are in accordance with a particular point of view. We formalize this as two NLP tasks: predicting judgments of (i) individuals and (ii) groups based on the text of the assertion and previous judgments. We evaluate a wide range of approaches on a crowdsourced data set containing over 100,000 judgments on over 2,000 assertions. We find that predicting individual judgments is a hard task with our best results only slightly exceeding a majority baseline, but that judgments of groups can be more reliably predicted using a Siamese neural network, which outperforms all other approaches by a wide margin.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX

Code (1)

muchafel/judgmentPrediction 공식 구현 tf

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

iLab at SemEval-2023 Task 11 Le-Wi-Di: Modelling Disagreement or Modelling Perspectives?

2023-05-10 · Nikolas Vitsakis, Amit Parekh, Tanvi Dinkar, Gavin Abercrombie 외

There are two competing approaches for modelling annotator disagreement: distributional soft-labelling approaches (which aim to capture the level of disagreement) or modelling perspectives of individual annotators or gro…

Learning Who Disagrees: Demographic Importance Weighting for Modeling Annotator Distributions with DiADEM

2026-04-09 · Samay U. Shetty, Tharindu Cyril Weerasooriya, Deepak Pandita, Christopher M. Homan arxiv

When humans label subjective content, they disagree, and that disagreement is not noise. It reflects genuine differences in perspective shaped by annotators' social identities and lived experiences. Yet standard practice…

PluriHarms: Benchmarking the Full Spectrum of Human Judgments on AI Harm

2026-01-13 · Jing-Jing Li, Joel Mire, Eve Fleisig, Valentina Pyatkin 외 arxiv

Current AI safety frameworks, which often treat harmfulness as binary, lack the flexibility to handle borderline cases where humans meaningfully disagree. To build more pluralistic systems, it is essential to move beyond…

Parser agreement and disagreement in L2 Korean UD: Implications for human-in-the-loop annotation

2026-05-07 · Hakyung Sung, Gyu-Ho Shin arxiv

We propose a simplified human-in-the-loop workflow for second language (L2) Korean morphosyntactic annotation by leveraging agreement between two domain-adapted parsers. We first evaluate whether parser agreement can ser…

LeWiDi-2025 at NLPerspectives: Third Edition of the Learning with Disagreements Shared Task

2025-10-09 · Elisa Leonardelli, Silvia Casola, Siyao Peng, Giulia Rizzi 외 arxiv

Many researchers have reached the conclusion that AI models should be trained to be aware of the possibility of variation and disagreement in human judgments, and evaluated as per their ability to recognize such variatio…

Natural Language InferenceParaphrase IdentificationSarcasm Detection