TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you will be presented with a context from an academic paper and a question separated with a
. You have to answer the question based on the context.
PROBLEM: A meta-research study found only 1 in 9 qualitative papers in Human-Computer Interaction reported inter-rater reliability metrics BIBREF31. Another related area are meta-research and methods papers focused on identifying or preventing low-effort responses from crowdworkers sometimes called "spam" or "random" responses, or alternatively "fraudsters" or "cheaters." Rates of "self-agreement" are often used, determining if the same person labels the same item differently at a later stage.
Question: What are the key issues around whether the gold standard data produced in such an annotation is reliable?

SOLUTION: only 1 in 9 qualitative papers in Human-Computer Interaction reported inter-rater reliability metrics low-effort responses from crowdworkers

PROBLEM: Suppose there are $M$ total layers, and define a subset of these layers at which to apply the loss function: $K = \lbrace k_1, k_2, ..., k_L
brace \subseteq \lbrace 1,..,M-1
brace $. The total objective function is then defined as

where $Z_{k_l}$ is the $k_l$-th Transformer layer activations, $Y$ is the ground-truth transcription for CTC and context dependent states for hybrid ASR, and $Loss(P, Y)$ can be defined as CTC objective BIBREF11 or cross entropy for hybrid ASR. T
Question: Do they just sum up all the loses the calculate to end up with one single loss?

SOLUTION: No

PROBLEM: Specifically, Roget's Thesaurus BIBREF38 , BIBREF39 is used to derive the concepts and concept word-groups to be used as the external lexical resource for our proposed method. By using the concept word-groups, we have trained the GloVe algorithm with the proposed modification given in Section SECREF4 on a snapshot of English Wikipedia measuring 8GB in size, with the stop-words filtered out.
Question: Do they report results only on English data?

SOLUTION:
Yes