Papers › DQI: Measuring Data Quality in NLP

DQI: Measuring Data Quality in NLP

2 May 2020arXiv:2005.00816archive 2025-07-28

Swaroop Mishra, Anjana Arunkumar, Bhavdeep Sachdeva, Chris Bryan, Chitta Baral

Neural language models have achieved human level performance across several NLP datasets. However, recent studies have shown that these models are not truly learning the desired task; rather, their high performance is attributed to overfitting using spurious biases, which suggests that the capabilities of AI systems have been over-estimated. We introduce a generic formula for Data Quality Index (DQI) to help dataset creators create datasets free of such unwanted biases. We evaluate this formula using a recently proposed approach for adversarial filtering, AFLite. We propose a new data creation paradigm using DQI to create higher quality data. The data creation paradigm consists of several data visualizations to help data creators (i) understand the quality of data and (ii) visualize the impact of the created data instance on the overall quality. It also has a couple of automation methods to (i) assist data creators and (ii) make the model more robust to adversarial attacks. We use DQI along with these automation methods to renovate biased examples in SNLI. We show that models trained on the renovated SNLI dataset generalize better to out of distribution tasks. Renovation results in reduced model performance, exposing a large gap with respect to human performance. DQI systematically helps in creating harder benchmarks using active learning. Our work takes the process of dynamic dataset creation forward, wherein datasets evolve together with the evolving state of the art, therefore serving as a means of benchmarking the true progress of AI.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

3 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 3 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 3 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from swarooprm/DQI. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections