Goto

Collaborating Authors

 annotation bias


Bias in, Bias out: Annotation Bias in Multilingual Large Language Models

Cui, Xia, Huang, Ziyi, Adel, Naeemeh

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Annotation bias in NLP datasets remains a major challenge for developing multilingual Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly in culturally diverse settings. Bias from task framing, annotator subjectivity, and cultural mismatches can distort model outputs and exacerbate social harms. We propose a comprehensive framework for understanding annotation bias, distinguishing among instruction bias, annotator bias, and contextual and cultural bias. We review detection methods (including inter-annotator agreement, model disagreement, and metadata analysis) and highlight emerging techniques such as multilingual model divergence and cultural inference. We further outline proactive and reactive mitigation strategies, including diverse annotator recruitment, iterative guideline refinement, and post-hoc model adjustments. Our contributions include: (1) a typology of annotation bias; (2) a synthesis of detection metrics; (3) an ensemble-based bias mitigation approach adapted for multilingual settings, and (4) an ethical analysis of annotation processes. Together, these insights aim to inform more equitable and culturally grounded annotation pipelines for LLMs.


Understanding and Mitigating Annotation Bias in Facial Expression Recognition

Chen, Yunliang, Joo, Jungseock

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

The performance of a computer vision model depends on the size and quality of its training data. Recent studies have unveiled previously-unknown composition biases in common image datasets which then lead to skewed model outputs, and have proposed methods to mitigate these biases. However, most existing works assume that human-generated annotations can be considered gold-standard and unbiased. In this paper, we reveal that this assumption can be problematic, and that special care should be taken to prevent models from learning such annotation biases. We focus on facial expression recognition and compare the label biases between lab-controlled and in-the-wild datasets. We demonstrate that many expression datasets contain significant annotation biases between genders, especially when it comes to the happy and angry expressions, and that traditional methods cannot fully mitigate such biases in trained models. To remove expression annotation bias, we propose an AU-Calibrated Facial Expression Recognition (AUC-FER) framework that utilizes facial action units (AUs) and incorporates the triplet loss into the objective function. Experimental results suggest that the proposed method is more effective in removing expression annotation bias than existing techniques.


Analysis of Automatic Annotation Suggestions for Hard Discourse-Level Tasks in Expert Domains

Schulz, Claudia, Meyer, Christian M., Kiesewetter, Jan, Sailer, Michael, Bauer, Elisabeth, Fischer, Martin R., Fischer, Frank, Gurevych, Iryna

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Many complex discourse-level tasks can aid domain experts in their work but require costly expert annotations for data creation. To speed up and ease annotations, we investigate the viability of automatically generated annotation suggestions for such tasks. As an example, we choose a task that is particularly hard for both humans and machines: the segmentation and classification of epistemic activities in diagnostic reasoning texts. We create and publish a new dataset covering two domains and carefully analyse the suggested annotations. We find that suggestions have positive effects on annotation speed and performance, while not introducing noteworthy biases. Envisioning suggestion models that improve with newly annotated texts, we contrast methods for continuous model adjustment and suggest the most effective setup for suggestions in future expert tasks.