银行标签错误

Cecilia Ying, Stephen Thomas
{"title":"银行标签错误","authors":"Cecilia Ying, Stephen Thomas","doi":"10.18653/v1/2022.insights-1.19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We investigate potential label errors present in the popular BANKING77 dataset and the associated negative impacts on intent classification methods. Motivated by our own negative results when constructing an intent classifier, we applied two automated approaches to identify potential label errors in the dataset. We found that over 1,400 (14%) of the 10,003 training utterances may have been incorrectly labelled. In a simple experiment, we found that by removing the utterances with potential errors, our intent classifier saw an increase of 4.5% and 8% for the F1-Score and Adjusted Rand Index, respectively, in supervised and unsupervised classification. This paper serves as a warning of the potential of noisy labels in popular NLP datasets. Further study is needed to fully identify the breadth and depth of label errors in BANKING77 and other datasets.","PeriodicalId":441528,"journal":{"name":"First Workshop on Insights from Negative Results in NLP","volume":"110 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Label Errors in BANKING77\",\"authors\":\"Cecilia Ying, Stephen Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.18653/v1/2022.insights-1.19\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We investigate potential label errors present in the popular BANKING77 dataset and the associated negative impacts on intent classification methods. Motivated by our own negative results when constructing an intent classifier, we applied two automated approaches to identify potential label errors in the dataset. We found that over 1,400 (14%) of the 10,003 training utterances may have been incorrectly labelled. In a simple experiment, we found that by removing the utterances with potential errors, our intent classifier saw an increase of 4.5% and 8% for the F1-Score and Adjusted Rand Index, respectively, in supervised and unsupervised classification. This paper serves as a warning of the potential of noisy labels in popular NLP datasets. Further study is needed to fully identify the breadth and depth of label errors in BANKING77 and other datasets.\",\"PeriodicalId\":441528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"First Workshop on Insights from Negative Results in NLP\",\"volume\":\"110 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"First Workshop on Insights from Negative Results in NLP\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.insights-1.19\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"First Workshop on Insights from Negative Results in NLP","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.insights-1.19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

我们研究了流行的BANKING77数据集中存在的潜在标签错误以及相关的对意图分类方法的负面影响。在构建意图分类器时,由于我们自己的负面结果,我们应用了两种自动化方法来识别数据集中潜在的标签错误。我们发现,在1003个训练话语中,超过1400个(14%)可能被错误地标记。在一个简单的实验中,我们发现通过去除潜在错误的话语,我们的意图分类器在监督和非监督分类中F1-Score和Adjusted Rand Index分别提高了4.5%和8%。本文对流行的自然语言处理数据集中可能存在的噪声标签提出了警告。需要进一步的研究来充分确定BANKING77和其他数据集中标签错误的广度和深度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Label Errors in BANKING77
We investigate potential label errors present in the popular BANKING77 dataset and the associated negative impacts on intent classification methods. Motivated by our own negative results when constructing an intent classifier, we applied two automated approaches to identify potential label errors in the dataset. We found that over 1,400 (14%) of the 10,003 training utterances may have been incorrectly labelled. In a simple experiment, we found that by removing the utterances with potential errors, our intent classifier saw an increase of 4.5% and 8% for the F1-Score and Adjusted Rand Index, respectively, in supervised and unsupervised classification. This paper serves as a warning of the potential of noisy labels in popular NLP datasets. Further study is needed to fully identify the breadth and depth of label errors in BANKING77 and other datasets.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信