Data Labeling Impact

Explore core Services

Why Datqo

Talk to a Core Ops Lead

contact@datqo.com
Call For Inquiry
+1 (805) 251-0673

More Service

01
Structured Ontologies

We start by designing a governed ontology: classes, attributes, relationships, and boundary cases. The taxonomy, label schema, and examples are written and versioned, then refined in a calibration pilot. Annotators and reviewers work from the same map, not a rough idea in someone’s head.

     • Ontology and class definitions documented, versioned, and owned
     • Boundary cases, gold examples, and counter-examples for each major class
     • Short decision paths for ambiguous, multi-label, or low-signal data
     • Change log for guideline updates with date, reason, and owner

02
Dual-Stage QA

We treat every dataset as if it will be audited later. A primary pass focuses on speed and guideline adherence; a second, independent QA pass focuses on correctness, edge cases, and drift. Disagreements are adjudicated and fed back into the ontology and guidelines so quality is repeatable, not a lucky run.

     • Primary labeling against written guidelines and target throughput
     • Independent QA pass with rubric and gold set on sampled or critical items
     • Disagreements and critical errors logged with reason, correction, owner, and fix-by date
     • QA metrics tracked weekly: pass rate, disagreement rate, and time-to-fix

03
Reviewer Calibration

Reviewers do not “eyeball and approve.” They calibrate. We run regular calibration rounds where multiple reviewers score the same items, compare rationales, and tighten the rubric. The goal is simple: different reviewers make the same decision for the same evidence, and any change to that behavior is visible in the metrics.
     • Scheduled calibration sets where reviewers label the same batch and compare rationales
     • Rubric updates and clarifications recorded with examples, not just slogans
     • Drift detection: shifts in reviewer decisions surfaced alongside IAA trends
     • Calibration results fed back into training, guidelines, and gold sets

04
Feedback Loops

We treat every error and disagreement as a signal, not a one-off mistake. QA findings, model performance, and production issues feed back into the ontology, guidelines, and training. The goal is that each cycle makes the next batch easier to label correctly, not harder.
     • QA and disagreement logs reviewed on a fixed cadence (weekly or per batch)
     • Common error patterns mapped back to guideline and ontology updates
     • Model and production feedback (false positives/negatives) folded into examples and edge cases
     • Changes communicated to annotators and reviewers with before/after examples

Human precision at machine scale

We treat accuracy in data labeling as a design problem, not extra effort. We build governed taxonomies, detailed edge-case rules, and reviewer workflows that balance human judgment with consistency. Every project starts from an agreed ontology, label schema, and QA rubric; automation handles the repetition, humans handle the nuance. Dual-stage QA and variance logs turn errors into measurable signals, so labeled datasets ship with both quality and proof you can audit later.

Step 01

Label Accuracy

QA pass rates move from ad-hoc to governed. Critical errors are caught and fixed with clear reasons, and corrections feed back into the ontology and guidelines so similar mistakes shrink over time.
Step 02

Reviewer Agreement

Different reviewers converge on the same decision for the same evidence. Inter-annotator agreement is monitored, disagreements are adjudicated with examples, and rubric updates keep judgment consistent across shifts and projects.
Step 03

Throughput Efficiency

Items per hour stop swinging wildly. Batches move through labeling and QA at a predictable pace, backlog is visible, and turnaround stays within target without relying on last-minute overtime.
Step 04

Retraining Impact

Datasets arrive clean, documented, and repeatable, so model retraining cycles focus on experimentation instead of data triage. Label issues are traceable to specific batches and rules, making fixes faster and future runs easier to trust.