Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
158 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) to Support Collaborative Human-AI Online Risk Data Annotation (2404.07926v1)

Published 11 Apr 2024 in cs.HC and cs.AI

Abstract: In this position paper, we discuss the potential for leveraging LLMs as interactive research tools to facilitate collaboration between human coders and AI to effectively annotate online risk data at scale. Collaborative human-AI labeling is a promising approach to annotating large-scale and complex data for various tasks. Yet, tools and methods to support effective human-AI collaboration for data annotation are under-studied. This gap is pertinent because co-labeling tasks need to support a two-way interactive discussion that can add nuance and context, particularly in the context of online risk, which is highly subjective and contextualized. Therefore, we provide some of the early benefits and challenges of using LLMs-based tools for risk annotation and suggest future directions for the HCI research community to leverage LLMs as research tools to facilitate human-AI collaboration in contextualized online data annotation. Our research interests align very well with the purposes of the LLMs as Research Tools workshop to identify ongoing applications and challenges of using LLMs to work with data in HCI research. We anticipate learning valuable insights from organizers and participants into how LLMs can help reshape the HCI community's methods for working with data.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (38)
  1. Will Affective Computing Emerge From Foundation Models and General Artificial Intelligence? A First Evaluation of ChatGPT. IEEE Intelligent Systems 38, 2 (2023), 15–23.
  2. Natã M Barbosa and Monchu Chen. 2019. Rehumanized crowdsourcing: A labeling framework addressing bias and ethics in machine learning. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12.
  3. Jody Clay-Warner. 2003. The context of sexual violence: Situational predictors of self-protective actions. Violence and victims 18, 5 (2003), 543–556.
  4. Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in newspaper website comments. Journal of Communication 64, 4 (2014), 658–679.
  5. Automatically detecting incivility in online discussions of news media. In 2018 IEEE 14th International Conference on e-Science (e-Science). IEEE, 318–319.
  6. Katharina Esau. 2022. Content Analysis in the Research Field of Incivility and Hate Speech in Online Communication. In Standardisierte Inhaltsanalyse in der Kommunikationswissenschaft–Standardized Content Analysis in Communication Research: Ein Handbuch-A Handbook. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden Wiesbaden, 451–461.
  7. Garbage in, garbage out? Do machine learning application papers in social computing report where human-labeled training data comes from?. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 325–336.
  8. Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election. Science 363, 6425 (2019), 374–378.
  9. Is civility contagious? Examining the impact of modeling in online political discussions. Social Media+ Society 4, 3 (2018), 2056305118793404.
  10. Assessing the news landscape: A multi-module toolkit for evaluating the credibility of news. In Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018. 235–238.
  11. Analyzing labeled cyberbullying incidents on the instagram social network. In International conference on social informatics. Springer, 49–66.
  12. “Leave your comment below”: Can biased online comments influence our own prejudicial attitudes and behaviors? Human communication research 41, 4 (2015), 557–576.
  13. Is chatgpt better than human annotators? potential and limitations of chatgpt in explaining implicit hate speech. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.07736 (2023).
  14. You Don’t Know How I Feel: Insider-Outsider Perspective Gaps in Cyberbullying Risk Detection. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Vol. 15. 290–302.
  15. Chatgpt: Beginning of an end of manual linguistic data annotation? use case of automatic genre identification. ArXiv, abs/2303.03953 (2023).
  16. Human-ai collaboration via conditional delegation: A case study of content moderation. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.
  17. Anna Litvinenko. 2023. The role of context in incivility research. In Challenges and perspectives of hate speech research, Christian Strippel, Sünje Paasch-Colberg, Martin Emmer, and Joachim Trebbe (Eds.). Digital Communication Research, Vol. 12. Berlin, 73–85. https://doi.org/10.48541/dcr.v12.5
  18. Summary of ChatGPT-Related Research and Perspective Towards the Future of Large Language Models. Meta-Radiology (2023), 100017.
  19. Discovering the sweet spot of human-computer configurations: A case study in information extraction. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (2019), 1–30.
  20. Designing ground truth and the social life of labels. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–16.
  21. OpenAI. 2023. Introducing ChatGPT. https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt
  22. OpenAI. 2024a. Security & Privacy. https://openai.com/security
  23. OpenAI. 2024b. What are tokens and how to count them? https://help.openai.com/en/articles/4936856-what-are-tokens-and-how-to-count-them
  24. Fine-tuning for multi-domain and multi-label uncivil language detection. In Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Online Abuse and Harms. 28–33.
  25. Cliodhna O’Connor and Helene Joffe. 2020. Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: debates and practical guidelines. International journal of qualitative methods 19 (2020), 1609406919899220.
  26. Toward Fairness in Misinformation Detection Algorithms. In Workshop Proceedings of the 16th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media. Retrieved from https://doi. org/10.36190.
  27. Misinformation Detection Algorithms and Fairness across Political Ideologies: The Impact of Article Level Labeling. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Web Science Conference 2023. 107–116.
  28. Towards Automated Detection of Risky Images Shared by Youth on Social Media. In Companion Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023. 1348–1357.
  29. Incivility and political identity on the Internet: Intergroup factors as predictors of incivility in discussions of news online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 22, 4 (2017), 163–178.
  30. Systematic review: Trust-building factors and implications for conversational agent design. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 37, 1 (2021), 81–96.
  31. Sergio Rojas-Galeano. 2017. On obstructing obscenity obfuscation. ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB) 11, 2 (2017), 1–24.
  32. Leonie Rösner and Nicole C Krämer. 2016. Verbal venting in the social web: Effects of anonymity and group norms on aggressive language use in online comments. Social Media+ Society 2, 3 (2016), 2056305116664220.
  33. Incivility detection in online comments. In Proceedings of the eighth joint conference on lexical and computational semantics (* SEM 2019). 283–291.
  34. Toward multimodal cyberbullying detection. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2090–2099.
  35. Detecting impoliteness and incivility in online discussions: Classification approaches for German user comments. Computational Communication Research 2, 1 (2020), 109–134.
  36. How would stance detection techniques evolve after the launch of chatgpt? arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.14548 (2022).
  37. QualiGPT: GPT as an easy-to-use tool for qualitative coding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.07061 (2023).
  38. Adam G Zimmerman and Gabriel J Ybarra. 2016. Online aggression: The influences of anonymity and social modeling. Psychology of Popular Media Culture 5, 2 (2016), 181.
Citations (1)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets