Abstract
We report our efforts in identifying a set of previous human evaluations in NLP that would be suitable for a coordinated study examining what makes human evaluations in NLP more/less reproducible. We present our results and findings, which include that just 13% of papers had (i) sufficiently low barriers to reproduction, and (ii) enough obtainable information, to be considered for reproduction, and that all but one of the experiments we selected for reproduction was discovered to have flaws that made the meaningfulness of conducting a reproduction questionable. As a result, we had to change our coordinated study design from a reproduce approach to a standardise-then-reproduce-twice approach. Our overall (negative) finding that the great majority of human evaluations in NLP is not repeatable and/or not reproducible and/or too flawed to justify reproduction, paints a dire picture, but presents an opportunity for a rethink about how to design and report human evaluations in NLP.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Insights from Negative Results in NLP |
Editors | Shabnam Tafreshi, Reddy Akula Arjun, Joao Sedoc, Aleksandr Drozd, Anna Rogers, Anna Rumshisky |
Publisher | Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL Anthology |
Pages | 1-10 |
Number of pages | 10 |
ISBN (Electronic) | 9781959429494 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2023 |
Event | 4th Workshop on Insights from Negative Results in NLP, INSIGHTS 2023 - Dubrovnik, Croatia Duration: 5-May-2023 → … |
Conference
Conference | 4th Workshop on Insights from Negative Results in NLP, INSIGHTS 2023 |
---|---|
Country/Territory | Croatia |
City | Dubrovnik |
Period | 05/05/2023 → … |