Annotation Exposure and the Chance of Any Recorded Error

Authors

  • Gregory Marshall Author
  • Evan Barnes Author
  • Austin Hall Author

Abstract

The question concerns response any-error association with annotation exposure. The secondary ordinary least squares analysis contains 845 observations and uses HC3 covariance. The coefficient on log_segments is 0.0414, with a 95 percent interval from -0.0099 to 0.0928. More annotated segments create more opportunities for at least one recorded error. Segment count is a released annotation quantity and was not experimentally varied. Value-aware model learning motivates connecting errors with consequential action, but these labels alone do not price that consequence or evaluate an interacting policy. The model is an exposure association, not a verbosity remedy. The estimates describe the released collection and its conditioning set. No new data collection, simulator experiment, or deployment-policy evaluation is claimed.

References

  1. Z. Qiao, J. Lyu, B. Lyu, Y. Shu, S. Gao, and S. Qiu, “Model-Based Offline RL via Robust Value-Aware Model Learning with Implicitly Differentiable Adaptive Weighting,” Proceedings of the 2026 International Conference on Learning Representations, 2026.
  2. S. Chen, Y. Zhao, J. Zhang, I.-C. Chern, S. Gao, P. Liu, and J. He, “FELM: Benchmarking Factuality Evaluation of Large Language Models,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 44502–44523, 2023.
  3. Tong, H., Xu, G., & Chen, Y. (2026, May). Hadamard Tensor Ring for Efficient Low-Rank Fine-Tuning. In ICASSP 2026-2026 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)
  4. Zhou, Yongxi, Wenbo Ye, Yuanzhe Liu, Zihan Dong, and Junwei Yao. “Style Over Substance: Content-Invariant Wrappers Flip LLM Safety-Judge Verdicts.” arXiv, 2026, arXiv:2609.08236. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.08236.
  5. Sang, Yinghao. “AutoCrit: A Meta-Reasoning Framework for Self-Critique and Iterative Error Correction in LLM Chains-of-Thought.” 2025 6th International Conference on Machine Learning and Computer Application (ICMLCA), IEEE, 2025, pp. 1177-1180. https://doi.org/10.1109/icmlca66850.2025.11336788.
  6. White, Halbert. “A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity.” Econometrica, vol. 48, no. 4, 1980, pp. 817–838. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912934.
  7. Cameron, A. Colin, and Douglas L. Miller. “A Practitioner’s Guide to Cluster-Robust Inference.” Journal of Human Resources, vol. 50, no. 2, 2015, pp. 317–372. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.50.2.317.
  8. Guo, Chuan, Geoff Pleiss, Yu Sun, and Kilian Q. Weinberger. “On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks.” Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, vol. 70, 2017, pp. 1321–1330. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v70/guo17a.html.
  9. Geifman, Yonatan, and Ran El-Yaniv. “Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networks.” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 30, 2017. https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08500.
  10. Ovadia, Yaniv, et al. “Can You Trust Your Model’s Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shift.” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 32, 2019. https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.02530.
  11. Lewis, Patrick, et al. “Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks.” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 33, 2020, pp. 9459–9474. https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.11401.
  12. Hu, Edward J., et al. “LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models.” International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. https://openreview.net/forum?id=nZeVKeeFYf9.
  13. Sutton, Richard S., and Andrew G. Barto. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. 2nd ed., MIT Press, 2018. http://incompleteideas.net/book/the-book-2nd.html.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-13

Versions

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 6 (2026): June 2026

Section

Articles