In traditional classification problems, the reference needed for training a classifier is given and considered to be absolutely correct. However, this does not apply to all tasks. In emotion recognition in non-acted speech, for instance, one often does not know which emotion was really intended by the speaker. Hence, the data is annotated by a group of human labelers who do not agree on one common class in most cases. Often, similar classes are confused systematically. We propose a new entropy-based method to evaluate classification results taking into account these systematic confusions. We can show that a classifier which achieves a recognition rate of "only" about 60 % on a four-class-problem performs as well as our five human labelers on average.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Steidl et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: