REVIEW 1 cited by
Statistical Dataset Evaluation: Reliability, Difficulty, and Validity
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
Datasets serve as crucial training resources and model performance trackers. However, existing datasets have exposed a plethora of problems, inducing biased models and unreliable evaluation results. In this paper, we propose a model-agnostic dataset evaluation framework for automatic dataset quality evaluation. We seek the statistical properties of the datasets and address three fundamental dimensions: reliability, difficulty, and validity, following a classical testing theory. Taking the Named Entity Recognition (NER) datasets as a case study, we introduce $9$ statistical metrics for a statistical dataset evaluation framework. Experimental results and human evaluation validate that our evaluation framework effectively assesses various aspects of the dataset quality. Furthermore, we study how the dataset scores on our statistical metrics affect the model performance, and appeal for dataset quality evaluation or targeted dataset improvement before training or testing models.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Quality over Quantity: An Effective Large-Scale Data Reduction Strategy Based on Pointwise V-Information
A PVI-based data reduction and progressive training strategy is applied to Chinese NLI, but the reported small accuracy declines do not match the experimental tables.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.