How much does a training data generation partner cost?
Pricing depends on modality, complexity, and the level of expert review required, but Abaka offers transparent unit economics so you can forecast spend. Common rates include $18/hr for LLM math/coding work, $12/hr for STEM generalists, $6/hr for dense captioning, and $3/km for road lane annotation. For evaluation programs, examples include $8/eval for red teaming and $12/eval for math capabilities. We’ll propose a pilot budget and a steady-state plan based on your throughput and QA targets.
How fast can you deliver a pilot dataset?
Most teams can start with a pilot in 2–3 weeks after scoping. Day 0–3 is typically used to finalize the rubric, acceptance criteria, and secure onboarding. Weeks 1–2 focus on producing a representative batch and calibrating QA (gold sets, reviewer escalation, and disagreement analysis). By Week 2–3, we iterate on guidelines and confirm delivery formats so the pilot results are training-ready and reproducible in your pipeline.
What modalities and output formats do you support for training data generation?
Abaka supports text, LLM RLHF, images, video, audio, 3D/4D point cloud, and LiDAR + camera fusion workflows. Outputs are delivered in practical formats for ML stacks such as JSONL, Parquet, CSV/TSV for text and RLHF, and common vision structures like COCO JSON or VOC XML. For 3D and sensor data, we deliver structured JSON/CSV metadata with sequence manifests and coordinate-frame conventions. We’ll align on exact formats during scoping to match your training and evaluation tooling.
What accuracy levels can you achieve for labeling and RLHF work?
Accuracy depends on the task definition and ambiguity, but Abaka is designed to hit high, measurable quality targets through calibrated rubrics and multi-layer QA. On suitable tasks with clear acceptance criteria, programs commonly target up to 99% accuracy using gold sets, reviewer audits, and batch-level drift monitoring. For RLHF and evaluation, we prioritize consistency and reproducibility by training raters against policy-aligned rubrics and routing uncertain cases to senior reviewers. You’ll see quality metrics and error analysis in every delivery cycle.
How do you handle security, NDAs, and compliance requirements?
Abaka runs strict NDAs, segregated secure pipelines, and controlled access workflows designed for enterprise security reviews. Our compliance posture aligns with SOC 2 and ISO 27001 practices and supports GDPR and CCPA requirements. We can tailor data handling to your constraints, including limiting access by role, enforcing reviewer escalation paths, and maintaining audit logs for changes and approvals. Just as important: your data remains exclusively yours—never repurposed, resold, or shared.
Can you support multilingual training data generation?
Yes. Abaka supports multilingual datasets with coverage across 50+ countries, including labeling, RLHF, and evaluation workflows. We localize rubrics—not just translations—so definitions remain consistent across languages and cultural contexts. For multilingual programs, we typically include language-specific reviewer checks and cross-language calibration to reduce drift. Outputs can be delivered as language-partitioned JSONL/Parquet or combined datasets with language metadata, depending on how your training pipeline samples and balances languages.
How are you different from other data labeling vendors?
Abaka is built for frontier AI teams that need trust, not just throughput. We combine platform execution (Abaka Forge), multi-layer QA, and domain-specialist reviewers for tasks like coding, math, medicine, and law. We also emphasize governance: secure pipelines, provenance, and clear change control so your datasets remain reproducible across model releases. Finally, Abaka never builds models that compete with you—your data is exclusive to your program and is never reused for someone else’s benefit.
What happens if we change the labeling guidelines mid-project?
Change is expected—especially for RLHF and evolving product requirements. We use versioned guidelines and a controlled change-request process: you approve the updated rubric, we run a calibration batch, and we quantify how the new definitions shift distributions and scores. If relabeling is needed, we recommend the smallest rework set that preserves training integrity (for example, only affected classes or high-impact slices). You’ll receive updated documentation and a clear mapping between versions so your team can reproduce experiments.
Can we start with a small pilot before committing to production?
Yes—most engagements start with a pilot designed to validate task definitions, QA thresholds, and delivery formats. In the pilot, we produce a representative batch, measure disagreement points, and refine rubrics until the outputs meet acceptance criteria. The pilot also establishes operational cadence, reporting structure, and unit economics so you can plan scale-up confidently. If the pilot meets targets, we expand the same workflow into steady-state production without retooling.
Who owns the training data and annotations you produce?
You do. Abaka’s operating principle is that your data is exclusively yours—never repurposed, resold, or shared. Deliverables, guidelines, and output formats are produced for your program and remain under your control. We also prioritize IP provenance in collection workflows to reduce copyright risk, and we maintain audit-friendly documentation so you can track how datasets were built and updated over time.
What tooling do you use to manage data generation and QA?
We use Abaka Forge, an all-in-one platform that supports collection, cleaning, annotation, RLHF, evaluation, and production workflows across text, image, video, audio, and 3D/4D point cloud. The platform supports automation to speed up repetitive steps while keeping humans as the final authority for correctness. It also enables versioning, role-based operations, and QA reporting so your team can review progress, spot drift, and approve changes with confidence.
Is there a minimum dataset size or minimum engagement?
There isn’t a one-size minimum, but most teams see the best results when the first engagement is large enough to validate edge cases and QA behavior—typically a pilot batch followed by a ramp plan. For smaller needs, we can propose a scoped evaluation set or targeted labeling sprint. For larger programs, we set up steady-state weekly deliveries with throughput and quality SLAs aligned to your roadmap. Talk to an Expert and we’ll recommend a right-sized pilot that matches your constraints.