Handling Missing Annotations on certain sentence about errant

[chrisjbryant]

Hi, I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Can you give an example?

[aashish-kumar]

Example: (to generate .m2 file like this one, assuming two annotators and some sentences having only single annotator)
'''
This is a tet sentence.
A 3 3 ||..........|||0
A 3 3 ||..........|||1
This is second tet sentence.
A 3 3 ||...........|||0
This is the third tet sentence.
A 4 4 ||............|||1
'''

[chrisjbryant]

Aha right ok. So in some files (mainly NUCLE and CoNLL) whenever an annotator is "missing", the implication is that they made no changes to the sentence. So in your above example, Annotator 1 thought the second sentence is already correct, and Annotator 0 thought the third sentence is already correct.

If it makes things easier, you can add a noop edit for each "missing" annotator to explicitly indicate that they made no changes to the sentence; e.g.
'''
This is second tet sentence.
A 3 3 ||...........|||0
A -1 -1|||noop|||-NONE-|||REQUIRED|||-NONE-|||1
This is the third tet sentence.
A -1 -1|||noop|||-NONE-|||REQUIRED|||-NONE-|||0
A 4 4 ||............|||1
'''

[aashish-kumar]

I think the case you mentioned can be handled by the current errant_parallel apis by making correction= source sentence.

In my case, all the annotators have not annotated all the sentences.
Continuing the example, the second sentence was not annotated by Annotator 1, i.e. Annotator 1 does not know that the second sentence is correct or not. In such cases, noop will not work.
I was wondering if in the correction file, we can insert a symbol saying the annotation is not present.

[chrisjbryant]

Ah I see. Yes, ERRANT was never designed for this as it's generally assumed that all annotators will annotate the same number of sentences otherwise correct sentences are indistinguishable from unannotated sentences.

There's no easy way around this; I wouldn't want to add a special symbol for missing annotations because this would also affect other datasets too.

The only other option I can think of is to change the annotator IDs based on how many annotations there are; e.g.
S Sentence1
A 2 2|||...|||0 - Annotator 0
A 2 3|||...|||1 - Annotator 1
A 4 6|||...|||2 - Annotator 2
S Sentence2
Missing - Annotator 0
A 4 5|||...|||0 - Annotator 1
A -1 -1|||...|||1 - Annotator 2
S Sentence3
A 2 2|||...|||0 - Annotator 0
Missing - Annotator 1
A 2 3|||...|||1 - Annotator 2

In Sentence1, all 3 annotators saw the sentence and made edits.
In Sentence2, Annotator 0 missed the sentence, Annotator 1 made an edit and became Annotator 0, and Annotator 2 saw the sentence but made no edits and became Annotator 1.
In Sentence 3, Annotator 0 made an edit and stayed as Annotator 0, Annotator 1 missed the sentence, and Annotator 2 made an edit and became Annotator 1.

This kind of structure will work in ERRANT, but note that the M2 annotator IDs will no longer refer to a specific annotator (if that's important, which it usually isn't).