TL;DR
This paper introduces ALE, a reproducible framework for empirically evaluating and comparing active learning strategies in NLP, aiding practitioners and researchers in making informed decisions and improving annotation efficiency.
Contribution
The paper presents a novel, easy-to-implement evaluation framework for comparing active learning strategies in NLP, addressing the lack of empirical performance data.
Findings
ALE enables low-effort, fair comparison of AL strategies
The framework supports reproducibility and customization of experiments
Case study demonstrates practical application of ALE
Abstract
Supervised machine learning and deep learning require a large amount of labeled data, which data scientists obtain in a manual, and time-consuming annotation process. To mitigate this challenge, Active Learning (AL) proposes promising data points to annotators they annotate next instead of a subsequent or random sample. This method is supposed to save annotation effort while maintaining model performance. However, practitioners face many AL strategies for different tasks and need an empirical basis to choose between them. Surveys categorize AL strategies into taxonomies without performance indications. Presentations of novel AL strategies compare the performance to a small subset of strategies. Our contribution addresses the empirical basis by introducing a reproducible active learning evaluation (ALE) framework for the comparative evaluation of AL strategies in NLP. The framework…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
MethodsFocus
