How much does a text annotation company cost?
Pricing depends on task type (NER vs. intent/slot vs. RLHF), domain complexity, and QA depth. Abaka offers real, transparent starting points: STEM generalist work is typically $12/hr, and LLM math/coding annotation is $18/hr when expert review is required. For dense captioning on multimodal programs, pricing can be $6/hr, and image editing tasks can be $8/hr. We’ll scope a pilot batch and provide a clear per-hour plan, expected throughput, and QA sampling so you can forecast total cost.
How fast can you start and deliver the first batch?
Most teams can start with a pilot in 2–3 weeks, depending on security onboarding and how mature your guidelines are. In Day 0–3 we align on schema, formats, and acceptance criteria, then run calibration during Week 1–2 to validate edge cases. Production scaling typically begins in Week 2–3 with controlled throughput and weekly deliveries. If you already have stable guidelines and a clean schema, timelines can be faster; if not, we’ll prioritize drift-proofing before volume.
What text annotation formats do you deliver?
We deliver in the formats your training and evaluation pipeline expects—commonly JSONL for LLM workflows, CSV for analytics and classical ML, and CoNLL/TSV for NER and sequence tagging. We also support BIO/IOB2 tag outputs, YAML label maps, and dataset cards describing schema and QA. If you need custom fields (reviewer metadata, rubric scores, adjudication flags), we’ll define a stable schema so downstream processing stays deterministic across versions.
What accuracy can you achieve for text labeling?
Abaka targets high accuracy through process design: calibration rounds, gold sets, multi-layer QA, and adjudication for disagreements. The right metric depends on your task—span boundary consistency for NER, confusion patterns for intents, or rubric agreement for RLHF. We commonly work toward 99% accuracy targets when the schema is well-defined and reviewers are properly calibrated. If your label space is evolving, we’ll propose drift controls and sampling so quality stays stable between batches.
How do you keep sensitive text data secure?
We operate with SOC 2 and ISO 27001-aligned controls and support GDPR and CCPA requirements. Projects run under strict NDAs with segregated secure pipelines and access controls tailored to your data classification. We maintain audit trails and controlled exports, and we do not repurpose or resell your data—ever. If your team requires additional constraints (limited fields, redaction, or separate environments), we’ll incorporate those into the workflow before the pilot starts.
Can you annotate multilingual text and non-English datasets?
Yes. Abaka supports annotation across 50+ countries and can staff locale-aware reviewers for multilingual NER, intent/slot, taxonomy labeling, and RLHF judgments. We treat multilingual work as more than translation: we adapt examples, clarify dialect-specific edge cases, and ensure policy interpretations are consistent across locales. Outputs include language tags, consistent label maps, and unified schemas so you can train multilingual models or evaluate cross-lingual robustness without format drift.
How are you different from other text annotation vendors?
Abaka is built for frontier AI programs that need both scale and rigor. We combine domain-specialist reviewers (math, coding, medicine, law, business) with multi-layer QA and Abaka Forge workflows, rather than relying on generic labeling alone. We also never build models that compete with you, and your data remains exclusively yours—never repurposed, resold, or shared. Finally, we’re self-funded and profitable, reducing incentives that can compromise data governance.
What if I need to change the taxonomy or guidelines mid-project?
Change requests are expected, especially for evolving products. We manage updates through versioned guidelines, structured change logs, and targeted backfills so you don’t have to re-annotate everything. During weekly reviews, we identify which labels are impacted, propose a migration strategy, and implement A/B checks to confirm consistency. Abaka Forge helps keep the project auditable: you can trace which guideline version produced each batch and what QA gates were applied.
Can we run a paid pilot before committing to a large program?
Yes. A paid pilot is the recommended path for most teams: we validate the schema, measure agreement, and confirm delivery formats before scaling. The pilot typically includes calibration, gold sets, and adjudication so you can see how drift and edge cases are handled in practice. You’ll receive a pilot report with quality findings, recommended guideline updates, and a production plan—team size, throughput expectations, and QA sampling—so scaling is a controlled step, not a leap of faith.
Who owns the labeled data and can you reuse it?
You own the data and the outputs. Abaka does not repurpose, resell, or share your datasets, and we do not use them to build competing models. We maintain full IP provenance and keep work products tied to your project under strict NDAs and segregated pipelines. If you need additional contractual language around exclusive ownership or retention policies, we’ll align during onboarding so expectations are explicit before any labeling begins.
What tools do you use for text annotation and QA?
We use Abaka Forge—our platform for collection, cleaning, annotation, and production workflows. It supports QA sampling, adjudication, reviewer calibration, and export pipelines across modalities, including text and RLHF. If your team already uses internal tooling, we can align on a compatible output schema and delivery process. The goal is repeatable, auditable annotation operations—not manual, one-off batches that are hard to reproduce.
What is the minimum dataset size or engagement to get started?
You can start small. Many teams begin with a pilot sized to validate guidelines and edge cases—enough volume to measure disagreement patterns without overspending. We’ll recommend a minimum that matches your task (for example, a representative set across intents, languages, or document types) and define acceptance criteria. From there, scaling is straightforward: we keep the same schema, QA gates, and delivery formats while increasing reviewer capacity and throughput.