cohen's kappa

**Cohen's Kappa (κ)** is a statistical measure of **inter-annotator agreement** between **two raters** that corrects for the amount of agreement expected by **random chance**. It is one of the most widely used metrics for assessing the reliability of human annotations in NLP and machine learning. **The Formula** $$\kappa = \frac{p_o - p_e}{1 - p_e}$$ Where: - $p_o$ = **observed agreement** — the proportion of items where both annotators assigned the same label. - $p_e$ = **expected agreement by chance** — the agreement that would occur if annotators labeled randomly according to their marginal label distributions. **Example Calculation** Two annotators label 100 movie reviews as positive or negative: - They agree on 85 reviews ($p_o = 0.85$) - By chance alone, they'd agree on about 52 ($p_e = 0.52$) - $\kappa = (0.85 - 0.52)/(1 - 0.52) = 0.33/0.48 = 0.69$ — substantial agreement **Interpretation** - **κ = 1**: Perfect agreement - **κ = 0**: Agreement is no better than chance - **κ < 0**: Agreement is worse than chance (systematic disagreement) - **κ > 0.8**: Generally considered excellent for most NLP tasks **Strengths** - **Chance Correction**: Unlike raw percent agreement, Kappa recognizes that some agreement happens by luck. - **Widely Understood**: Standard metric across NLP, medicine, psychology, and social sciences. - **Easy to Compute**: Simple formula with readily available implementations. **Limitations** - **Two Raters Only**: Cohen's Kappa works for exactly two annotators. For more, use **Fleiss' Kappa** or **Krippendorff's Alpha**. - **Nominal Data Only**: Designed for categorical labels. For ordinal data, use **weighted Kappa**. - **Prevalence Sensitivity**: When one category is much more common, high raw agreement can still yield low Kappa due to high expected chance agreement (the **Kappa paradox**).

Go deeper with CFSGPT

Get AI-powered deep-dives, save terms, and run advanced simulations — free account.

Create Free Account