Many Natural Language Processing (NLP) systems use annotated corpora for training and evaluation. However, labeled data is often costly to obtain and scaling annotation projects is difficult, which is why annotation tasks are often outsourced to paid crowdworkers. Citizen Science is an alternative to crowdsourcing that is relatively unexplored in the context of NLP. To investigate whether and how well Citizen Science can be applied in this setting, we conduct an exploratory study into engaging different groups of volunteers in Citizen Science for NLP by re-annotating parts of a pre-existing crowdsourced dataset. Our results show that this can yield high-quality annotations and at- tract motivated volunteers, but also requires considering factors such as scalability, participation over time, and legal and ethical issues. We summarize lessons learned in the form of guidelines and provide our code and data to aid future work on Citizen Science.

Activation functions can have a significant impact on reducing the topological complexity of input data and therefore, improving a model’s performance. However, the choice of activation functions is seldom discussed or explored in Transformer-based language models. As a common practice, commonly used activation functions like Gaussian Error Linear Unit (GELU) are chosen beforehand and then remain fixed from pre-training to fine-tuning. In this paper, we investigate the impact of activation functions on Transformer-based models by utilizing rational activation functions (RAFs). In contrast to fixed activation functions (FAF), RAFs are capable of learning the optimal activation functions from data. Our experiments show that the RAF-based Transformer model (RAFT) achieves a better performance than its FAF-based counterpart (). For instance, we find that RAFT outperforms on the GLUE benchmark by 5.71 points when using only 100 training examples and by 2.05 points on SQuAD with all available data. Analyzing the shapes of the learned RAFs further unveils that they vary across different layers and different tasks; opening a promising way to better analyze and understand large, pre-trained language models.

Annotation studies often require annotators to familiarize themselves with the task, its annotation scheme, and the data domain. This can be overwhelming in the beginning, mentally taxing, and induce errors into the resulting annotations; especially in citizen science or crowdsourcing scenarios where domain expertise is not required. To alleviate these issues, this work proposes annotation curricula, a novel approach to implicitly train annotators. The goal is to gradually introduce annotators into the task by ordering instances to be annotated according to a learning curriculum. To do so, this work formalizes annotation curricula for sentence- and paragraph-level annotation tasks, defines an ordering strategy, and identifies well-performing heuristics and interactively trained models on three existing English datasets. Finally, we provide a proof of concept for annotation curricula in a carefully designed user study with 40 voluntary participants who are asked to identify the most fitting misconception for English tweets about the Covid-19 pandemic. The results indicate that using a simple heuristic to order instances can already significantly reduce the total annotation time while preserving a high annotation quality. Annotation curricula thus can be a promising research direction to improve data collection. To facilitate future research—for instance, to adapt annotation curricula to specific tasks and expert annotation scenarios—all code and data from the user study consisting of 2,400 annotations is made available.1

The authors of this work (“Annotation Curricula to Implicitly Train Non-Expert Annotators” by Ji-Ung Lee, Jan-Christoph Klie, and Iryna Gurevych in Computational Linguistics 48:2 https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00436) discovered an incorrect inequality symbol in section 5.3 (page 360). The paper stated that the differences in the annotation times for the control instances result in a p-value of 0.200 which is smaller than 0.05 (p = 0.200 < 0.05). As 0.200 is of course larger than 0.05, the correct inequality symbol is p = 0.200 > 0.05, which is in line with the conclusion that follows in the text. The paper has been updated accordingly.

Collecting and annotating task-oriented dialog data is difficult, especially for highly specific domains that require expert knowledge. At the same time, informal communication channels such as instant messengers are increasingly being used at work. This has led to a lot of work-relevant information that is disseminated through those channels and needs to be post-processed manually by the employees. To alleviate this problem, we present TexPrax, a messaging system to collect and annotate _problems_, _causes_, and _solutions_ that occur in work-related chats. TexPrax uses a chatbot to directly engage the employees to provide lightweight annotations on their conversation and ease their documentation work. To comply with data privacy and security regulations, we use an end-to-end message encryption and give our users full control over their data which has various advantages over conventional annotation tools. We evaluate TexPrax in a user-study with German factory employees who ask their colleagues for solutions on problems that arise during their daily work. Overall, we collect 202 task-oriented German dialogues containing 1,027 sentences with sentence-level expert annotations. Our data analysis also reveals that real-world conversations frequently contain instances with code-switching, varying abbreviations for the same entity, and dialects which NLP systems should be able to handle.

This work investigates the use of interactively updated label suggestions to improve upon the efficiency of gathering annotations on the task of opinion mining in German Covid-19 social media data. We develop guidelines to conduct a controlled annotation study with social science students and find that suggestions from a model trained on a small, expert-annotated dataset already lead to a substantial improvement – in terms of inter-annotator agreement (+.14 Fleiss’ κ) and annotation quality – compared to students that do not receive any label suggestions. We further find that label suggestions from interactively trained models do not lead to an improvement over suggestions from a static model. Nonetheless, our analysis of suggestion bias shows that annotators remain capable of reflecting upon the suggested label in general. Finally, we confirm the quality of the annotated data in transfer learning experiments between different annotator groups. To facilitate further research in opinion mining on social media data, we release our collected data consisting of 200 expert and 2,785 student annotations.

Existing approaches to active learning maximize the system performance by sampling unlabeled instances for annotation that yield the most efficient training. However, when active learning is integrated with an end-user application, this can lead to frustration for participating users, as they spend time labeling instances that they would not otherwise be interested in reading. In this paper, we propose a new active learning approach that jointly optimizes the seemingly counteracting objectives of the active learning system (training efficiently) and the user (receiving useful instances). We study our approach in an educational application, which particularly benefits from this technique as the system needs to rapidly learn to predict the appropriateness of an exercise to a particular user, while the users should receive only exercises that match their skills. We evaluate multiple learning strategies and user types with data from real users and find that our joint approach better satisfies both objectives when alternative methods lead to many unsuitable exercises for end users.

Visual modifications to text are often used to obfuscate offensive comments in social media (e.g., “!d10t”) or as a writing style (“1337” in “leet speak”), among other scenarios. We consider this as a new type of adversarial attack in NLP, a setting to which humans are very robust, as our experiments with both simple and more difficult visual perturbations demonstrate. We investigate the impact of visual adversarial attacks on current NLP systems on character-, word-, and sentence-level tasks, showing that both neural and non-neural models are, in contrast to humans, extremely sensitive to such attacks, suffering performance decreases of up to 82%. We then explore three shielding methods—visual character embeddings, adversarial training, and rule-based recovery—which substantially improve the robustness of the models. However, the shielding methods still fall behind performances achieved in non-attack scenarios, which demonstrates the difficulty of dealing with visual attacks.

We propose two novel manipulation strategies for increasing and decreasing the difficulty of C-tests automatically. This is a crucial step towards generating learner-adaptive exercises for self-directed language learning and preparing language assessment tests. To reach the desired difficulty level, we manipulate the size and the distribution of gaps based on absolute and relative gap difficulty predictions. We evaluate our approach in corpus-based experiments and in a user study with 60 participants. We find that both strategies are able to generate C-tests with the desired difficulty level.