Annotation Process Sample Clauses

Annotation Process. To carry out the annotation work, we recruited five Dutch archaeology students at the Bachelor level. We specifically selected students in their second and third year, as some basic knowledge of archaeology is extremely helpful in determining whether a word is a specific entity or not. The students were asked to annotate a total of 16 hours each, over a two week period, during which they could come and work at times that suited them, a few hours at a time. We opted not to have the students work a whole day on this task, as the annotation process is tedious and monotonous, which makes it hard to keep concentration. Loss in concentration can cause mislabelling, and so having them work for only small amounts of time might help prevent this. The students were first asked to thoughtfully read the guidelines and ask any questions. During annotation, we were always present to resolve difficult sentences and entities and explain to the students how to handle these. The students reported this to be very helpful, and learned from each other’s prob- lems. Most of these issues were relatively rare edge case though, and the original annotation guidelines covered most encountered entities sufficiently.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Annotation Process. Our annotation task consisted of annotating persua- sion techniques in a corpus consisting of circa 1600 news articles revolving around various globally dis- cussed topics in six languages: English, French, German, Italian, Polish, and Russian, using the taxonomy introduced earlier. A balanced mix of mainstream media and “alternative” media sources that could potentially spread mis/disinformation were considered for the sake of creating the dataset. Furthermore, sources with different political orien- tation were covered as well. The pool of annotators consisted of circa 40 per- sons, all native or near-native speakers of the lan- guage they annotated. Most of the annotators were either media analysts or researchers and experts in (computational) linguistics, where approximately 80% of the annotators had prior experience in per- forming linguistic annotations of news-like texts. A thorough training was provided to all annotators which consisted of: (a) reading a 60-page anno- tation guidelines (Xxxxxxxxx et al., 2023a) — an excerpt thereof is provided in Appendix C), (b) participating in online multi-choice question-like training, (c) carrying out pilot annotations on xxx- ple documents, and (d) joint sharing experience with other annotators and discussions with the or- ganisers of the annotation task. Subsequently, each document was annotated by at least two annotators independently. On a weekly basis reports were sent to annotator pairs highlighting complementary and potentially conflicting annotations in order to con- verge to a common understanding of the task, and regular meetings were held with all annotators to align and to discuss specific annotation cases. Annotations were curated in two steps. In the first step (document-level curation) the independent annotations were jointly discussed by the annota- tors and a curator, where the latter was a more experienced annotator, whose role was to xxxxxx- xxxx making a decision about the final annotations, including: (a) merging the complementary anno- tations (tagged only by one annotator), and (b) re- solving the identified potential label conflicts. In the second step (corpus-level curation) a global consistency analysis was carried out. The rationale behind this second step was to identify inconsisten- cies that are difficult to spot using single-document annotation view and do comparison at corpus level, e.g., comparing whether identical or near-identical text snippets were tagged with the same or a ...
Sample 1
Annotation Process. Before Xxxx et al. (2003), Xxxxx, Amorrortu, & Xxxxxx (1999) performed a RST corpus annotation which led to the development of an annotation protocol that Xxxx et al. (2003) followed. First this work will be summarized.
Sample 1
Annotation Process. Prior to the annotation process, the annotators were trained with the annotation guideline. The pursued annotation process of the TDB can be explained in the following four steps (Xxxxxx et al., 2009):
Sample 1

Related to Annotation Process

  • Application Process The employees wishing to enter into a job share arrangement will apply in writing to the Employer and forward a copy to the Union outlining the proposed commencement date of the job share, how the hours and days of work will be shared and how communication and continuity of work will be maintained. The Employer shall communicate a decision on a job share request in writing to the applicants. Applications to Job Sharing shall not be unreasonably denied.

  • Selection Process The Mortgage Loans were selected from among the outstanding one- to four-family mortgage loans in the Seller's portfolio at the related Closing Date as to which the representations and warranties set forth in Subsection 9.02 could be made and such selection was not made in a manner so as to affect adversely the interests of the Purchaser;

  • Mediation Process A. Mediation is a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) that may be requested by the City or the PBA. It is an alternative, not a substitute for the formal arbitration process contained in Section 19.7 above. Mediation is an informal process in which a neutral third party assists the opposing parties in reaching a voluntary, negotiated resolution of a charge of discipline. The decision to mediate is completely voluntary for the PBA and the City. Mediation gives the parties the opportunity to discuss the issues raised in the charging document, clear up misunderstandings, determine the underlying interests or concerns, find areas of agreement and, ultimately, incorporate those areas of agreement into solutions. A mediator does not resolve the charge or impose a decision on the parties. Instead, the mediator helps the parties to agree on a mutually acceptable resolution. The mediation process is strictly confidential. Information disclosed during mediation will not be revealed to anyone.

  • Evaluation Process A. The immediate supervisor will meet with an employee at the start of the employee’s probationary, trial services, transition, and annual review period to discuss performance expectations. The employee will receive copies of their performance expectations as well as notification of any modifications made during the review period. Employee work performance will be evaluated during probationary, trial service and transition review periods and at least annually thereafter. Notification will be given to a probationary or trial service employee whose work performance is determined to be unsatisfactory.

  • Escalation Process 9.1. There will be times when the pharmacist will need additional advice or will need to escalate the patient to a higher acuity care location (e.g. back to their GP or an Urgent Treatment Centre or A&E).

  • Issue Resolution Process Section 1001:

  • Negotiation Process (a) If either the Chief Executive Officer of ICANN (“CEO”) or the Chairperson of the Registry Stakeholder Group (“Chair”) desires to discuss any revision(s) to this Agreement, the CEO or Chair, as applicable, shall provide written notice to the other person, which shall set forth in reasonable detail the proposed revisions to this Agreement (a “Negotiation Notice”). Notwithstanding the foregoing, neither the CEO nor the Chair may

  • Verification Procedure (1) The signature file of each processed file is validated.

  • Arbitration Process Any arbitration will be conducted pursuant to the applicable rules (the “Arbitration Rules”) of the American Arbitration Association, as modified herein, to the extent such modifications are not prohibited by the Arbitration Rules. The arbitration will be conducted in Indianapolis, Indiana. The parties will select a single arbitrator, but in the event that the parties are unable to agree, the arbitrator will be appointed pursuant to the Arbitration Rules. The arbitrator will be a practicing attorney with significant expertise in litigating and/or presiding over cases involving the substantive legal areas involved in the dispute. The parties to the arbitration will not request, and the arbitrator will not order, that any discovery be taken or provided, including depositions, interrogatories or document requests, except to the extent the amount in controversy exceeds $50,000. The arbitration will be concluded within three months of the date the arbitrator is appointed. The arbitrator’s findings, reasoning, decision, and award will be stated in writing and based upon applicable law. Judgment on the arbitration award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. In the event that the arbitration results in an award which imposes an injunction or contains a monetary award in excess of $100,000, the award will be reviewable on appeal initiated by filing notice of appeal with the AAA office within 30 days of the award, governed by the AAA Optional Appellate Arbitration Rules and conducted by a panel of three new arbitrators, ruling by majority, under the procedure for appointment from the national roster of arbitrators. Unless the applicable Arbitration Rules require otherwise, arbitration fees and costs will be shared equally by the claimant(s) and respondent(s), respectively, in any arbitration proceeding. Should the AAA be unavailable, unable or unwilling to accept and administer the arbitration of any claim under these arbitration provisions as written, the parties will agree on a substitute arbitration organization, such as JAMS, that will enforce the arbitration provisions as written. Because this Agreement memorializes a transaction in interstate commerce, the Federal Arbitration Act governs the interpretation and enforcement of these arbitration provisions. More information about arbitration, including the Arbitration Rules, is available at xxx.xxx.xxx or by calling 0-000-000-0000.

  • Application Procedures a) An employee applies for a listing on the system-wide registry through the employee’s Human Resources Department by completing the form in Appendix B.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!