Papers › HumAID: Human-Annotated Disaster Incidents Data from Twitter with Deep Learning Benchmarks
HumAID: Human-Annotated Disaster Incidents Data from Twitter with Deep Learning Benchmarks
Firoj Alam, Umair Qazi, Muhammad Imran, Ferda Ofli
Social networks are widely used for information consumption and dissemination, especially during time-critical events such as natural disasters. Despite its significantly large volume, social media content is often too noisy for direct use in any application. Therefore, it is important to filter, categorize, and concisely summarize the available content to facilitate effective consumption and decision-making. To address such issues automatic classification systems have been developed using supervised modeling approaches, thanks to the earlier efforts on creating labeled datasets. However, existing datasets are limited in different aspects (e.g., size, contains duplicates) and less suitable to support more advanced and data-hungry deep learning models. In this paper, we present a new large-scale dataset with ~77K human-labeled tweets, sampled from a pool of ~24 million tweets across 19 disaster events that happened between 2016 and 2019. Moreover, we propose a data collection and sampling pipeline, which is important for social media data sampling for human annotation. We report multiclass classification results using classic and deep learning (fastText and transformer) based models to set the ground for future studies. The dataset and associated resources are publicly available. https://crisisnlp.qcri.org/humaid_dataset.html
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
No code repository is listed for this paper in the archive or in Syntology's graph.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Datasets
Introduced by this paper, per the archive.
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