Interactive annotation process Sample Clauses

Interactive annotation process. Figure 3.2. The workflow of interactive annotation process In the online learning mode (See Figure 3.2) of information extraction, the user either manually extracts information from each document, or inspects and correct, if necessary, any prefilled values by the system in the “Output Form”. As the user moves through the document collection, the system learns features of correct and incorrect answers by comparing system extracted values and manually revised ones. Through this process, the decision model improves, and the amount of information that the system is able to correctly prefill grows over time. As one might expect, the "Output Form" for the first few documents may be empty. When perform classification, user specifies the following information to construct a classification attribute: input attributes, labels of output classes, and machine learning model of classification. While processing each instance, user specifies the class label for each classification attribute. When new instance gets loaded, the system populates labels for classification attributes automatically. User then verify and revise system generated class label to further improve the accuracy of classification. Once the decision model accrues an acceptable level of accuracy, the user has the option to turn off manual review and to allow the system to complete the extraction/classification for the remaining documents in batch mode. A demo video can be found in YouTube [8].
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Interactive annotation process

  • 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;

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Consultation Process (a) At the time of providing written notice of reduction to affected Employee(s), the Employer shall:

  • 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

  • Seniority Verification Process i. The new school district shall provide the employee with the necessary verification form at the time the employee achieves continuing contract status.

  • Benchmarking Process 2.2.1 The Supplier shall produce and send to the Authority for Approval, a draft plan for the Benchmark Review.

  • Review and Selection Process The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.

  • ONLINE PUBLIC AUCTION PROCESS 2.1. E-Bidders may browse through the PAH Website and select the properties they wish to bid online.

  • 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.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.