@inproceedings{sarumi-etal-2025-nlp,
    title = "{NLP}-{R}es{T}eam at {L}e{W}i{D}i-2025:Performance Shifts in Perspective Aware Models based on Evaluation Metrics",
    author = "Sarumi, Olufunke O.  and
      Welch, Charles  and
      Braun, Daniel",
    editor = "Abercrombie, Gavin  and
      Basile, Valerio  and
      Frenda, Simona  and
      Tonelli, Sara  and
      Dudy, Shiran",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the The 4th Workshop on Perspectivist Approaches to NLP",
    month = nov,
    year = "2025",
    address = "Suzhou, China",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://preview.aclanthology.org/ingest-emnlp/2025.nlperspectives-1.19/",
    pages = "219--227",
    ISBN = "979-8-89176-350-0",
    abstract = "Recent works in Natural Language Processing have focused on developing methods to model annotator perspectives within subjective datasets, aiming to capture opinion diversity. This has led to the development of various approaches that learn from disaggregated labels, leading to the question of what factors most influence the performance of these models. While dataset characteristics are a critical factor, the choice of evaluation metric is equally crucial, especially given the fluid and evolving concept of perspectivism. A model considered state-of-the-art under one evaluation scheme may not maintain its top-tier status when assessed with a different set of metrics, highlighting a potential challenge between model performance and the evaluation framework. This paper presents a performance analysis of annotator modeling approaches using the evaluation metrics of the 2025 Learning With Disagreement (LeWiDi) shared task and additional metrics. We evaluate five annotator-aware models under the same configurations. Our findings demonstrate a significant metric-induced shift in model rankings. Across four datasets, no single annotator modeling approach consistently outperformed others using a single metric, revealing that the ``best'' model is highly dependent on the chosen evaluation metric. This study systematically shows that evaluation metrics are not agnostic in the context of perspectivist model assessment."
}