Section 034 · Chapter 5, Judges, Humans, and Disagreement

Testing the Value of Data Labelers

Data labelers create the ground truth many AI evaluations depend on. Their value should be measured, not assumed.

data labelersearch relevancevalue data labelers

What to do

  1. Start by measuring agreement.
  2. Use chance-adjusted agreement when the stakes justify it.
  3. Measure labeler value against outcomes.
  4. Track disagreement by category.
  5. Test the guideline, too.

Evidence to preserve

  • Track disagreement by category.
  • Preserve the inputs, versions, configurations, raw outcomes, and results for data labeler, search relevance, value data labelers needed to reproduce work on Testing the Value of Data Labelers.
  • Report results for data labeler, search relevance, value data labelers by relevant slice, separate blocker failures from averages, state uncertainty and blind spots, and connect the result to a release decision.

Expert note

When the system matters, measure marginal labeler value. Compare one-rater, two-rater, three-rater, and expert-adjudicated labels against downstream model ranking, judge calibration, release decisions, and production outcomes. Stop buying labels that make the dataset larger but not more trustworthy.

Continue the conversation

Apply this to your context.

Save your product context once, then open a focused conversation that combines it with this concept.

Cite this page

Jason Arbon. "Testing the Value of Data Labelers." Testing AI Knowledge Edition, section 34.

https://jarbon.ai/testing-ai/knowledge/ch034-value-data-labelers.html

Shared across the Knowledge Edition

Adapt every concept to your world.

Describe your product, role, users, risks, constraints, or current quality problem. This stays in this browser until you choose to send it to ChatGPT.

Saved only in this browser.0 / 2400