Supervised machine learning has become the cornerstone of today’s data-driven society, increasing the need for labeled data. However, the process of acquiring labels is often expensive and tedious. One possible remedy is to use active learning (AL) – a special family of machine learning algorithms designed to reduce labeling costs. Although AL has been successful in practice, a number of practical challenges hinder its effectiveness and are often overlooked in existing AL annotation tools. To address these challenges, we developed ALANNO, an open-source annotation system for NLP tasks equipped with features to make AL effective in real-world annotation projects. ALANNO facilitates annotation management in a multi-annotator setup and supports a variety of AL methods and underlying models, which are easily configurable and extensible.

Pre-trained language models (PLMs) have ignited a surge in demand for effective fine-tuning techniques, particularly in low-resource domains and languages. Active learning (AL), a set of algorithms designed to decrease labeling costs by minimizing label complexity, has shown promise in confronting the labeling bottleneck. In parallel, adapter modules designed for parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) have demonstrated notable potential in low-resource settings. However, the interplay between AL and adapter-based PEFT remains unexplored. We present an empirical study of PEFT behavior with AL in low-resource settings for text classification tasks. Our findings affirm the superiority of PEFT over full-fine tuning (FFT) in low-resource settings and demonstrate that this advantage persists in AL setups. We further examine the properties of PEFT and FFT through the lens of forgetting dynamics and instance-level representations, where we find that PEFT yields more stable representations of early and middle layers compared to FFT. Our research underscores the synergistic potential of AL and PEFT in low-resource settings, paving the way for advancements in efficient and effective fine-tuning.

Developed to alleviate prohibitive labeling costs, active learning (AL) methods aim to reduce label complexity in supervised learning. While recent work has demonstrated the benefit of using AL in combination with large pre-trained language models (PLMs), it has often overlooked the practical challenges that hinder the effectiveness of AL. We address these challenges by leveraging representation smoothness analysis to ensure AL is feasible, that is, both effective and practicable. Firstly, we propose an early stopping technique that does not require a validation set – often unavailable in realistic AL conditions – and observe significant improvements over random sampling across multiple datasets and AL methods. Further, we find that task adaptation improves AL, whereas standard short fine-tuning in AL does not provide improvements over random sampling. Our work demonstrates the usefulness of representation smoothness analysis for AL and introduces an AL stopping criterion that reduces label complexity.

Active learning (AL) aims to reduce labeling costs by querying the examples most beneficial for model learning. While the effectiveness of AL for fine-tuning transformer-based pre-trained language models (PLMs) has been demonstrated, it is less clear to what extent the AL gains obtained with one model transfer to others. We consider the problem of transferability of actively acquired datasets in text classification and investigate whether AL gains persist when a dataset built using AL coupled with a specific PLM is used to train a different PLM. We link the AL dataset transferability to the similarity of instances queried by the different PLMs and show that AL methods with similar acquisition sequences produce highly transferable datasets regardless of the models used. Additionally, we show that the similarity of acquisition sequences is influenced more by the choice of the AL method than the choice of the model.

A popular approach to unveiling the black box of neural NLP models is to leverage saliency methods, which assign scalar importance scores to each input component. A common practice for evaluating whether an interpretability method is faithful has been to use evaluation-by-agreement – if multiple methods agree on an explanation, its credibility increases. However, recent work has found that saliency methods exhibit weak rank correlations even when applied to the same model instance and advocated for alternative diagnostic methods. In our work, we demonstrate that rank correlation is not a good fit for evaluating agreement and argue that Pearson-r is a better-suited alternative. We further show that regularization techniques that increase faithfulness of attention explanations also increase agreement between saliency methods. By connecting our findings to instance categories based on training dynamics, we show that the agreement of saliency method explanations is very low for easy-to-learn instances. Finally, we connect the improvement in agreement across instance categories to local representation space statistics of instances, paving the way for work on analyzing which intrinsic model properties improve their predisposition to interpretability methods.

Expressing attitude or stance toward entities and concepts is an integral part of human behavior and personality. Recently, evaluative language data has become more accessible with social media’s rapid growth, enabling large-scale opinion analysis. However, surprisingly little research examines the relationship between personality and evaluative language. To bridge this gap, we introduce the notion of evaluative topics, obtained by applying topic models to pre-filtered evaluative text from social media. We then link evaluative topics to individual text authors to build their evaluative profiles. We apply evaluative profiling to Reddit comments labeled with personality scores and conduct an exploratory study on the relationship between evaluative topics and Big Five personality facets, aiming for a more interpretable, facet-level analysis. Finally, we validate our approach by observing correlations consistent with prior research in personality psychology.