Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Data Quality Assessment: Challenges and Opportunities

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 2403.00526 v2 pith:EIMBYW2R submitted 2024-03-01 cs.DB

Data Quality Assessment: Challenges and Opportunities

classification cs.DB
keywords dataqualityassessmentchallengesdimensionshighresearchability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Data-oriented applications, their users, and even the law require data of high quality. Research has divided the rather vague notion of data quality into various dimensions, such as accuracy, consistency, and reputation. To achieve the goal of high data quality, many tools and techniques exist to clean and otherwise improve data. Yet, systematic research on actually assessing data quality in its dimensions is largely absent, and with it, the ability to gauge the success of any data cleaning effort. We propose five facets as ingredients to assess data quality: data, source, system, task, and human. Tapping each facet for data quality assessment poses its own challenges. We show how overcoming these challenges helps data quality assessment for those data quality dimensions mentioned in Europe's AI Act. Our work concludes with a proposal for a comprehensive data quality assessment framework.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Intuitions of Machine Learning Researchers about Transfer Learning for Medical Image Classification

    cs.CV 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0

    Source-dataset selection for medical transfer learning is driven by community practice and perceived similarity, and 'more similar is better' does not consistently hold.