Lune

EMNLP Findings2022

Yes-Yes-Yes: Proactive Data Collection for ACL Rolling Review and Beyond

Nils Dycke, Ilia Kuznetsov, Iryna Gurevych

Abstract

The shift towards publicly available text sources has enabled language processing at unprecedented scale, yet leaves under-serviced the domains where public and openly licensed data is scarce. Proactively collecting text data for research is a viable strategy to address this scarcity, but lacks systematic methodology taking into account the many ethical, legal and confidentiality-related aspects of data collection. Our work presents a case study on proactive data collection in peer reviewa challenging and under-resourced NLP domain. We outline ethical and legal desiderata for proactive data collection and introduce "Yes-Yes-Yes", the first donation-based peer reviewing data collection workflow that meets these requirements. We report on the implementation of Yes-Yes-Yes at ACL Rolling Review 1 and empirically study the implications of proactive data collection for the dataset size and the biases induced by the donation behavior on the peer reviewing platform.

Ask Lune

Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.

Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.

Questions to start from

Lune answers from

the full paper · 5 top-tier papers that cite it · related work

Get the answer

Free to start. No credit card required.

Cited by top-tier papers5

  1. Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer ReviewsWeixin Liang, Zachary Izzo, Yaohui Zhang, Haley Lepp et al.ICML 2024 · 213 citations
  2. NLPeer: A Unified Resource for the Computational Study of Peer ReviewNils Dycke, Ilia Kuznetsov, Iryna GurevychACL 2023 · 17 citations
  3. Can AI Be a Good Peer Reviewer? A Survey of Peer Review Process, Evaluation, and the FutureSihong Wu, Owen Jiang, Yilun Zhao, Tiansheng Hu et al.ACL 2026 · 2 citations
  4. LazyReview: A Dataset for Uncovering Lazy Thinking in NLP Peer ReviewsSukannya Purkayastha, Zhuang Li, Anne Lauscher, Lizhen Qu et al.ACL 2025 · 1 citation
  5. An Inclusive Notion of TextIlia Kuznetsov, Iryna GurevychACL 2023

Builds on6

  1. APE: Argument Pair Extraction from Peer Review and Rebuttal via Multi-task LearningLiying Cheng, Lidong Bing, Qian Yu, Wei Lu et al.EMNLP 2020 · 56 citations
  2. Catch Me if I Can: Detecting Strategic Behaviour in Peer AssessmentIvan Stelmakh, Nihar B. Shah, Aarti SinghAAAI 2021 · 43 citations
  3. 'Just What do You Think You're Doing, Dave?' A Checklist for Responsible Data Use in NLPAnna Rogers, Timothy Baldwin, Kobi LeinsEMNLP Findings 2021 · 42 citations
  4. What Can We Do to Improve Peer Review in NLP?Anna Rogers, Isabelle AugensteinEMNLP Findings 2020 · 32 citations
  5. Prior and Prejudice: The Novice Reviewers' Bias against Resubmissions in Conference Peer ReviewIvan Stelmakh, Nihar B. Shah, Aarti Singh, Hal Daumé IIICSCW 2021 · 17 citations

Related papers

  1. Use of Formal Ethical Reviews in NLP Literature: Historical Trends and Current PracticesSebastin Santy, Anku Rani, Monojit ChoudhuryACL Findings 2021 · 9 citations
  2. Beyond Metadata: What Paper Authors Say About Corpora They UseNikolay Kolyada, Martin Potthast, Benno SteinACL Findings 2021
  3. Making Revisions Understandable: A Survey of Edit Intentions, Methods, and ApplicationsFangping Lan, Qi Zhang, Eduard C. DragutACL Findings 2026
  4. Interpreting Answers to Yes-No Questions in User-Generated ContentShivam Mathur, Keun Hee Park, Dhivya Chinnappa, Saketh Kotamraju et al.EMNLP Findings 2023 · 1 citation
  5. Does Putting a Linguist in the Loop Improve NLU Data Collection?Alicia Parrish, William Huang, Omar Agha, Soo-Hwan Lee et al.EMNLP Findings 2021 · 21 citations
Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines