Select, Label, Evaluate: Active Testing in NLP

arXiv cs.CL / 3/24/2026

💬 OpinionIdeas & Deep AnalysisModels & Research

Key Points

  • The paper addresses the high cost and time of high-quality test-set annotation in NLP by introducing a framework called Active Testing that selects only the most informative samples within a labeling budget.
  • It formalizes Active Testing for NLP and benchmarks multiple existing approaches across 18 datasets, 4 embedding strategies, and 4 NLP tasks to quantify tradeoffs between annotation savings and evaluation accuracy.
  • Results show annotation reductions of up to 95% while keeping model performance estimation within 1% of what is obtained using a full test set.
  • The authors find that method effectiveness varies by data characteristics and task type, and no single approach consistently outperforms others across all settings.
  • To remove the need to predefine a labeling budget, they propose an adaptive stopping criterion that automatically determines how many samples to annotate for the desired estimation quality.

Abstract

Human annotation cost and time remain significant bottlenecks in Natural Language Processing (NLP), with test data annotation being particularly expensive due to the stringent requirement for low-error and high-quality labels necessary for reliable model evaluation. Traditional approaches require annotating entire test sets, leading to substantial resource requirements. Active Testing is a framework that selects the most informative test samples for annotation. Given a labeling budget, it aims to choose the subset that best estimates model performance while minimizing cost and human effort. In this work, we formalize Active Testing in NLP and we conduct an extensive benchmarking of existing approaches across 18 datasets and 4 embedding strategies spanning 4 different NLP tasks. The experiments show annotation reductions of up to 95%, with performance estimation accuracy difference from the full test set within 1%. Our analysis reveals variations in method effectiveness across different data characteristics and task types, with no single approach emerging as universally superior. Lastly, to address the limitation of requiring a predefined annotation budget in existing sample selection strategies, we introduce an adaptive stopping criterion that automatically determines the optimal number of samples.