Weisong Yang

Taku Yamagata, Emma L. Tonkin, Benjamin Arana Sanchez et al.

In supervised learning, low quality annotations lead to poorly performing classification and detection models, while also rendering evaluation unreliable. This is particularly apparent on temporal data, where annotation quality is affected by multiple factors. For example, in the post-hoc self-reporting of daily activities, cognitive biases are one of the most common ingredients. In particular, reporting the start and duration of an activity after its finalisation may incorporate biases introduced by personal time perceptions, as well as the imprecision and lack of granularity due to time rounding. Here we propose a method to model human biases on temporal annotations and argue for the use of soft labels. Experimental results in synthetic data show that soft labels provide a better approximation of the ground truth for several metrics. We showcase the method on a real dataset of daily activities.

Rafael Poyiadzi, Weisong Yang, Niall Twomey et al.

In this paper we provide machine learning practitioners with tools to answer the question: is there class-conditional noise in my labels? In particular, we present hypothesis tests to check whether a given dataset of instance-label pairs has been corrupted with class-conditional label noise, as opposed to uniform label noise, with the former biasing learning, while the latter -- under mild conditions -- does not. The outcome of these tests can then be used in conjunction with other information to assess further steps. While previous works explore the direct estimation of the noise rates, this is known to be hard in practice and does not offer a real understanding of how trustworthy the estimates are. These methods typically require anchor points -- examples whose true posterior is either 0 or 1. Differently, in this paper we assume we have access to a set of anchor points whose true posterior is approximately 1/2. The proposed hypothesis tests are built upon the asymptotic properties of Maximum Likelihood Estimators for Logistic Regression models. We establish the main properties of the tests, including a theoretical and empirical analysis of the dependence of the power on the test on the training sample size, the number of anchor points, the difference of the noise rates and the use of relaxed anchors.