Live data from Hacker News

30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

surgehq.ai

131–140 of 146 posts

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#131
This points out the much more ubiquitous problem of people simply misunderstanding one another. It's very, very common for someone to post a comment intending to emphasize or convey one idea, but it gets interpreted as emphasizing or meaning something different, just because it's read by a person different than who wrote it.

It's not limited to Reddit comments, or even to written communication either. "You're ignoring me!" "No, I'm trying to give you space."

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#132
post #38

Language is hard! Even I, a seasoned native internet dork, have trouble knowing if someone's comment is sarcasm, irony, or something in between. Also, new phrases emerge all the time that turn a phrase on its head, and it has a different emotion. How many feelings can you evoke with a simple, FUCK!

And this is probably going to get even worse the more automatic classification is used to promote or silence content. A pretty interesting result of this is what I'd call "TikTok speak", where words are replaced, either by similar sounding ones ("porn" => "corn", often times just the corn emoji) or by neologisms ("to kill" => "to unalive"), in the hope of getting around the filters. This turns natural language on the…

The most interesting thing is imo that people often say one thing, but put a similar-sounding word or a homophone in the subtitles, and the filter seems to trust the user-supplied subtitles.

I hope nobody trains speach-to-text systems on a tiktok dataset.

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#133
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good news for you: being your target audience, we actually did have you guys on our radar.I For the scale of our project, however, the price point was prohibitive. We ended up building a small cli tool that interactively trained the model, and allowed us to focus on the most important messages (eg those where positive/negative sentiment was closest, the labels with the smallest volume, etc). EDIT: If I now look at yo…

$20/hour to classify data sounds reasonable though? If you have more time than money it might not make sense, but at that price point I could save myself a lot of time by just working a few extra hours doing SE and let someone else do 3x that amount of labelling.

I fully agree $20/hr is reasonable, it just was too expensive for us at that time.

So in the end the whole problem boils down to “quality is (more) expensive”; but MTurk is a special case since they’re so heavily positioning themselves as “the” solution for this and they’re terrible.

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#134

> LETS FUCKING GOOOOO Could be either anger (let’s fight) or enthusiasm (let’s do it!). Hard problem.

I don't see anger in "LETS F**ING GOOOOO". It's just a comment that says "let's do X" in impatient and enthusiastic manner.

As a native speaker of Reddit English, "LET'S GOOOOO" is a slang expression that means "yay". People who write it are usually not literally suggesting that the reader go somewhere or do something.

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#135
post #31

I've worked on project with more difficult labeling, and we were able to get fairly accurate results. There are tons of standard practices that produce better results, so why did Google ignore them.

Could you point me to resources about best practices in this domain? I've struggled with this and it would potentially help.

I wish I could. I know what I wrote was kind of a tease.

We hired domain experts to build our protocol. I know there were best practices they adhered to because we were one of several groups all of whose experts independently generated similar protocols. And the language they used to discuss it with each other.

Mostly we hired people with the best academic research credentials in field we were researching we could afford to build the labeling protocol. Which surprises me because it was expensive, but it wasn't "I have Google money behind me" expensive.

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#136
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isnt knowing the subreddit valuable information to determine sentiment?

But it also applies to the model. If you label data taking into account the context (which subreddit this was posted), your model also must take this into account, or it will be wrong as well. If the same sentence can be labeled two different ways depending on the source, then, the model must also know the source or it won't know what to do. But then you didn't create a general language model, you created a reddit la…

Excellent point.

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#137
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder how others do this kind of thing. Assuming I have 100k text blurbs I want to classify of sentiment and/or emotion and want at least 95% accuracy, what are the options? Others who successfully do it have exactly the same secret sauce that you do: they assign it to someone who is well-compensated and competent. The one time I needed anything remotely like this I just took the old "nobody said programming was…

But then STEM would have to admit that English Lit Majors didn't waste their money /s

One of my university professors liked to quip: next time someone tells you that you're arguing semantics, ask them what semantics means. That'll teach 'em.

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#138
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a sentiment / emotion classification project, we (2 founders) just ended up doing most of the labeling ourselves. It was a big grind, but given how abysmal the performance of “crowd-sourced” solutions are (eg Amazon Mechanical Turk), and how incredibly important the quality of these labels are for training a model, it made the most sense. I wonder how others do this kind of thing. Assuming I have 100k text blurbs…

I was using MTurk for labeling about 10 years ago. To see the other side I also did a 1 Month stint as a MTurk worker, earning about $300. It is absolutely horrible work, and I used MTurk subreddit to find the "decent" jobs. I had the special firefox extension which ranked the job givers etc. All jobs were below 1st world minimum wage and were incredibly depressing. I think the adult content ones were the worst. "Jia…

> To see the other side I also did a 1 Month stint as a MTurk worker, earning about $300.

are you me?

I did the same thing (worked as a mTurk labeler for 2 weeks) which convinced me to never use mTurk for anything even remotely important.

I've been able to use semi-supervised approaches with actual domain experts reviewing outputs.

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#139
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was using MTurk for labeling about 10 years ago. To see the other side I also did a 1 Month stint as a MTurk worker, earning about $300. It is absolutely horrible work, and I used MTurk subreddit to find the "decent" jobs. I had the special firefox extension which ranked the job givers etc. All jobs were below 1st world minimum wage and were incredibly depressing. I think the adult content ones were the worst. "Jia…

I'm eager to see what nefarious things Google will do once they've mastered the art of identifying all the busses in a photo!

https://xkcd.com/1897/

Re: 30% of Google's Emotions Dataset Is Mislabeled

#140
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s easy but requires time. Like turning a page is easy but turning a million pages takes time.

That's what I'm saying. Classifying one data point is very straightforward and brings negligible value to a company. Reliably classifying hundreds of thousands of them is very complicated and not at all easily supervised. And if your company's business model is based on applying trained models to $real_world_problem, it doesn't just bring a lot of value to your company, it's literally critical for its success, just l…

Are you trolling us here? The act of classifying is easy. It needs to be repeated many times. So you scale up by hiring many people to do it.
Post reply on HN