REVIEW 3 cited by
Measuring Data
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
We identify the task of measuring data to quantitatively characterize the composition of machine learning data and datasets. Similar to an object's height, width, and volume, data measurements quantify different attributes of data along common dimensions that support comparison. Several lines of research have proposed what we refer to as measurements, with differing terminology; we bring some of this work together, particularly in fields of computer vision and language, and build from it to motivate measuring data as a critical component of responsible AI development. Measuring data aids in systematically building and analyzing machine learning (ML) data towards specific goals and gaining better control of what modern ML systems will learn. We conclude with a discussion of the many avenues of future work, the limitations of data measurements, and how to leverage these measurement approaches in research and practice.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Research Community Perspectives on "Intelligence" and Large Language Models
A survey of 303 researchers finds that generalization, adaptability, and reasoning are the most agreed-upon criteria for intelligence, and that most researchers do not consider current LLM-based systems intelligent.
-
A Multimodal Dataset for Large Language Model Applications in the Energy Domain
mAIEnergy is a harmonized, FAIR multimodal energy dataset (text, imagery, numerical series, geospatial graphs) purpose-built for LLM pre-training and retrieval-augmented generation.
-
TEDI: Trustworthy and Ethical Dataset Indicators to Analyze and Compare Dataset Documentation
A new 143-indicator rubric applied to 114 human-voice datasets shows that documentation of consent, privacy, and harmful content is rare, and that scraping yields scale at the cost of documented ethical practices.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.