Manuel added a comment.
Thank you! @Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE: Is it fair to assume that the randomization is in this case random enough for our purposes? According to the conversation, I would suggest the following: 1. Let's do the manual evaluation only for edits that were done without a bot flag. This would mean that before training ORES we would have to add those to the dataset (and give them a blanco positive evaluation). 2. Let's do the manual evaluation for big classes that are mainly edited by tools only with a reduced resolution. This might reduce the quality of their ORES evaluations later on, but I hope it should not be an issue. We could also combine this with a similar approach as described in 1. This would give us: 0 edits for isbot = true max 60 edits each for - scholarly articles - stars max 30 edits each for - Wikimedia category - Wikimedia disambiguation page - Wikimedia template - galaxy Result: F34930339: T297347_stratified_sample_v1.csv <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/F34930339> What do you think? TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T297347 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: hoo, Manuel Cc: Ladsgroup, Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Michael, Manuel, Aklapper, Lydia_Pintscher, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Mbch331
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
