跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.01712 · v1

When Disagreement Labels Do Not Identify F1 Rankings

首次提交 2026-11-01 17:01
版本更新 2026-11-01 17:01
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:43
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Agreement labels cancel from an accuracy comparison but can change an F1 ranking. We specialize partial identification to an explicit audit after labeling disagreements: two agreement counts give exact bounds, certifying a ranking or a choice within a specified F1 tolerance under every completion. Across 3,200 frozen model pairs, shared completions tighten bounds and a 0.01 tolerance reduces labeling costs. A zero-loss (weak-winner) control attributes most savings to positive tolerance, not ties. Guarantees concern the evaluated batch, not future data.

作者备注:6 pages, 1 figure, 1 table. Submitted to ESANN 2027, submission ES2027-34. Code and reproducibility artifact: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23647323

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-01 17:01 · 最新观测版本

When Disagreement Labels Do Not Identify F1 Rankings

Agreement labels cancel from an accuracy comparison but can change an F1 ranking. We specialize partial identification to an explicit audit after labeling disagreements: two agreement counts give exact bounds, certifying a ranking or a choice within a specified F1 tolerance under every completion. Across 3,200 frozen model pairs, shared completions tighten bounds and a 0.01 tolerance reduces labeling costs. A zero-loss (weak-winner) control attributes most savings to positive tolerance, not ties. Guarantees concern the evaluated batch, not future data.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗