Enregistré dans:
| Auteurs principaux: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Publié: |
2026
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.22585 |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| _version_ | 1866908853499592704 |
|---|---|
| author | Casabianca, Jodi M. Beiting-Parrish, Maggie |
| author_facet | Casabianca, Jodi M. Beiting-Parrish, Maggie |
| contents | Human evaluations play a central role in training and assessing AI models, yet these data are rarely treated as measurements subject to systematic error. This paper integrates psychometric rater models into the AI pipeline to improve the reliability and validity of conclusions drawn from human judgments. The paper reviews common rater effects, severity and centrality, that distort observed ratings, and demonstrates how item response theory rater models, particularly the multi-faceted Rasch model, can separate true output quality from rater behavior. Using the OpenAI summarization dataset as an empirical example, we show how adjusting for rater severity produces corrected estimates of summary quality and provides diagnostic insight into rater performance. Incorporating psychometric modeling into human-in-the-loop evaluation offers more principled and transparent use of human data, enabling developers to make decisions based on adjusted scores rather than raw, error-prone ratings. This perspective highlights a path toward more robust, interpretable, and construct-aligned practices for AI development and evaluation. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2602_22585 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Correcting Human Labels for Rater Effects in AI Evaluation: An Item Response Theory Approach Casabianca, Jodi M. Beiting-Parrish, Maggie Artificial Intelligence Machine Learning Human evaluations play a central role in training and assessing AI models, yet these data are rarely treated as measurements subject to systematic error. This paper integrates psychometric rater models into the AI pipeline to improve the reliability and validity of conclusions drawn from human judgments. The paper reviews common rater effects, severity and centrality, that distort observed ratings, and demonstrates how item response theory rater models, particularly the multi-faceted Rasch model, can separate true output quality from rater behavior. Using the OpenAI summarization dataset as an empirical example, we show how adjusting for rater severity produces corrected estimates of summary quality and provides diagnostic insight into rater performance. Incorporating psychometric modeling into human-in-the-loop evaluation offers more principled and transparent use of human data, enabling developers to make decisions based on adjusted scores rather than raw, error-prone ratings. This perspective highlights a path toward more robust, interpretable, and construct-aligned practices for AI development and evaluation. |
| title | Correcting Human Labels for Rater Effects in AI Evaluation: An Item Response Theory Approach |
| topic | Artificial Intelligence Machine Learning |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.22585 |