Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

CleanCoNLL: A Nearly Noise-Free Named Entity Recognition Dataset

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

arxiv 2310.16225 v1 pith:ASPRFIBD submitted 2023-10-24 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG
keywords annotationerrorsconll-03entitystate-of-the-artapproachescleanconlldata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The CoNLL-03 corpus is arguably the most well-known and utilized benchmark dataset for named entity recognition (NER). However, prior works found significant numbers of annotation errors, incompleteness, and inconsistencies in the data. This poses challenges to objectively comparing NER approaches and analyzing their errors, as current state-of-the-art models achieve F1-scores that are comparable to or even exceed the estimated noise level in CoNLL-03. To address this issue, we present a comprehensive relabeling effort assisted by automatic consistency checking that corrects 7.0% of all labels in the English CoNLL-03. Our effort adds a layer of entity linking annotation both for better explainability of NER labels and as additional safeguard of annotation quality. Our experimental evaluation finds not only that state-of-the-art approaches reach significantly higher F1-scores (97.1%) on our data, but crucially that the share of correct predictions falsely counted as errors due to annotation noise drops from 47% to 6%. This indicates that our resource is well suited to analyze the remaining errors made by state-of-the-art models, and that the theoretical upper bound even on high resource, coarse-grained NER is not yet reached. To facilitate such analysis, we make CleanCoNLL publicly available to the research community.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. From Calibration to Collaboration: LLM Uncertainty Quantification Should Be More Human-Centered

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    LLM uncertainty quantification should be judged by whether it improves real human decisions, not by calibration scores on trivia benchmarks.

Pith tools