Active Learning Stopping Strategies for Technology-Assisted Sensitivity Review

G. Mcdonald, C. Macdonald, I. Ounis
{"title":"Active Learning Stopping Strategies for Technology-Assisted Sensitivity Review","authors":"G. Mcdonald, C. Macdonald, I. Ounis","doi":"10.1145/3397271.3401267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Active learning strategies are often deployed in technology-assisted review tasks, such as e-discovery and sensitivity review, to learn a classifier that can assist the reviewers with their task. In particular, an active learning strategy selects the documents that are expected to be the most useful for learning an effective classifier, so that these documents can be reviewed before the less useful ones. However, when reviewing for sensitivity, the order in which the documents are reviewed can impact on the reviewers' ability to perform the review. Therefore, when deploying active learning in technology-assisted sensitivity review, we want to know when a sufficiently effective classifier has been learned, such that the active learning can stop and the reviewing order of the documents can be selected by the reviewer instead of the classifier. In this work, we propose two active learning stopping strategies for technology-assisted sensitivity review. We evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed approaches in comparison with three state-of-the-art stopping strategies from the literature. We show that our best performing approach results in a significantly more effective sensitivity classifier (+6.6% F2) than the best performing stopping strategy from the literature (McNemar's test, p<0.05).","PeriodicalId":252050,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 43rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 43rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3397271.3401267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Active learning strategies are often deployed in technology-assisted review tasks, such as e-discovery and sensitivity review, to learn a classifier that can assist the reviewers with their task. In particular, an active learning strategy selects the documents that are expected to be the most useful for learning an effective classifier, so that these documents can be reviewed before the less useful ones. However, when reviewing for sensitivity, the order in which the documents are reviewed can impact on the reviewers' ability to perform the review. Therefore, when deploying active learning in technology-assisted sensitivity review, we want to know when a sufficiently effective classifier has been learned, such that the active learning can stop and the reviewing order of the documents can be selected by the reviewer instead of the classifier. In this work, we propose two active learning stopping strategies for technology-assisted sensitivity review. We evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed approaches in comparison with three state-of-the-art stopping strategies from the literature. We show that our best performing approach results in a significantly more effective sensitivity classifier (+6.6% F2) than the best performing stopping strategy from the literature (McNemar's test, p<0.05).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
技术辅助敏感性评价的主动学习停止策略
主动学习策略通常部署在技术辅助的审查任务中,例如电子发现和敏感性审查,以学习可以帮助审查者完成任务的分类器。特别是,主动学习策略选择对学习有效分类器最有用的文档,以便可以在不太有用的文档之前查看这些文档。然而,在进行敏感性评审时,评审文档的顺序可能会影响评审人员执行评审的能力。因此,在技术辅助敏感性审查中部署主动学习时,我们想知道什么时候已经学习到一个足够有效的分类器,以便主动学习可以停止,并且可以由审稿人而不是分类器来选择文档的审查顺序。在这项工作中,我们提出了两种主动学习停止策略,用于技术辅助敏感性审查。我们评估了我们提出的方法的有效性,并与文献中三种最先进的停止策略进行了比较。我们表明,我们表现最好的方法产生的灵敏度分类器(+6.6% F2)明显高于文献中表现最好的停止策略(McNemar检验,p<0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
MHM: Multi-modal Clinical Data based Hierarchical Multi-label Diagnosis Prediction Correlated Features Synthesis and Alignment for Zero-shot Cross-modal Retrieval DVGAN Models Versus Satisfaction: Towards a Better Understanding of Evaluation Metrics Global Context Enhanced Graph Neural Networks for Session-based Recommendation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1