arXiv (All)
open access
Quality and Agreement in Multilabel Emotion Annotation: A Case Study and Evaluation Framework
Emotion annotation is inherently subjective, yet most NLP pipelines still assume "gold" labels, typically produced by majority voting, and treat annotator variation as noise. In this paper, we present a multilabel emotion annotation case study and use it to examine how annotator behavior and aggrega
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- SELF & FEIL: Emotion and Intensity Lexicons for Finnish#1344391
- Large Language Models Are Effective Human Annotation Assistants, But Not Good Independent Annotators#177042
- AI-based Multi-center Research on Identification/Classification/Aided Diagnosis of Mood Disorder#890242
- LPI-RIT at LeWiDi-2025: Improving Distributional Predictions via Metadata and Loss Reweighting with DisCo#821715
- POSITIVE RESPONSE-FOCUSED EMOTION REGULATION STRATEGIES AS PREDICTORS FOR SELF-REFERENT INFORMATION RETRIEVAL#301543
Record · ID 1344625
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive