A method, system and a computer program product are provided for verifying ground truth data by iteratively assigning machine-annotated training set examples to clusters which are prioritized based on verification scores to identify and display one or more prioritized review candidate training set examples grouped in a prioritized cluster in order to solicit verification or correction feedback from a human subject matter expert for inclusion in an accepted training set.
Please help me write a proper abstract based on the patent claims. CLAIM: 1. A method of verifying ground truth data, the method comprising: receiving, by an information handling system, comprising a processor and a memory, ground truth data comprising a human-curated training set; performing, by the information handling system, annotation operations on the training set using an annotator to generate a machine-annotated training set; assigning, by the information handling system, examples from the machine-annotated training set to one or more clusters according to a feature vector similarity measure; analyzing, by the information handling system, the one or more clusters to prioritize clusters based on verification scores computed for each cluster; and displaying, by the information handling system, machine-annotated training set examples associated with a prioritized cluster as prioritized review candidates to solicit verification or correction feedback from a human subject matter expert (SME) for inclusion in an accepted training set. 2. The method of claim 1, where the annotator comprises a dictionary annotator, rule-based annotator, or a machine learning annotator. 3. The method of claim 1, where assigning examples from the machine-annotated training set to one or more clusters comprises: generating a vector representation for each of example from the machine-annotated training set; and applying one or more feature selection algorithms to the vector representations of the machine-annotated training set examples to identify the one or more clusters. 4. The method of claim 1, where analyzing the one or more clusters comprises computing a verification score for each cluster as a confidence metric which quantifies how likely that annotations in the cluster are true positives based on a training model for the feature set of a given annotation cluster. 5. The method of claim 1, where analyzing the one or more clusters comprises computing a verification score for each cluster as an Inter Annotator Agreement (IAA) score measuring how consistent annotations of the human SME are with annotations from a group of human SMEs for a given annotation cluster. 6. The method of claim 1, where analyzing the one or more clusters comprises computing a verification score for each cluster as a cluster size score measuring a given annotation cluster. 7. The method of claim 1, where analyzing the one or more clusters comprises computing a verification score for each cluster as a cross-validation score measuring how similar the machine-annotated training set examples are to a feature set for a given annotation cluster. 8. The method of claim 1, further comprising verifying or correcting all prioritized review candidates in a cluster as a single group based on verification or correction feedback from the human subject matter expert. 9. A computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium having a computer readable program stored therein, wherein the computer readable program, when executed on an information handling system, causes the system to verify ground truth data by: receiving ground truth data comprising a human-curated training set; performing annotation operations on the training set using an annotator to generate a machine-annotated training set; assigning examples from the machine-annotated training set to one or more clusters according to a feature vector similarity measure; analyzing the one or more clusters to prioritize clusters based on verification scores computed for each cluster; and displaying machine-annotated training set examples associated with a prioritized cluster as prioritized review candidates to solicit verification or correction feedback from a human subject matter expert (SME) for inclusion in an accepted training set. 10. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein the computer readable program, when executed on the system, causes the system to perform annotation operations using a dictionary annotator, rule-based annotator, or a machine learning annotator. 11. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein the computer readable program, when executed on the system, causes the system to assign examples from the machine-annotated training set to one or more clusters by: generating a vector representation for each of example from the machine-annotated training set; and applying one or more feature selection algorithms to the vector representations of the machine-annotated training set examples to identify the one or more clusters. 12. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein the computer readable program, when executed on the system, causes the system to analyze the one or more clusters by computing a verification score for each cluster as a confidence metric which quantifies how likely that annotations in the cluster are true positives based on a training model for the feature set of a given annotation cluster. 13. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein the computer readable program, when executed on the system, causes the system to analyze the one or more clusters by computing a verification score for each cluster as an Inter Annotator Agreement (IAA) score measuring how consistent annotations of the human SME are with annotations from a group of human SMEs for a given annotation cluster. 14. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein the computer readable program, when executed on the system, causes the system to analyze the one or more clusters by computing a verification score for each cluster as a cluster size score measuring a given annotation cluster. 15. The computer program product of claim 9, wherein the computer readable program, when executed on the system, causes the system to analyze the one or more clusters by computing a verification score for each cluster as a cross-validation score measuring how similar the machine-annotated training set examples are to a feature set for a given annotation cluster. 16. The computer program product of claim 9, further comprising computer readable program, when executed on the system, causes the system to verify or correct all prioritized review candidates in a cluster as a single group based on verification or correction feedback from the human subject matter expert. 17. An information handling system comprising: one or more processors; a memory coupled to at least one of the processors; and a set of instructions stored in the memory and executed by at least one of the processors to verify ground truth data, wherein the set of instructions are executable to perform actions of: receiving, by the system, ground truth data comprising a human-curated training set; perforating, by the system, annotation operations on the training set using an annotator to generate a machine-annotated training set; assigning, by the system, examples from the machine-annotated training set to one or more clusters according to a feature vector similarity measure; analyzing, by the system, the one or more clusters to prioritize clusters based on verification scores computed for each cluster; and displaying, by the system, machine-annotated training set examples associated with a prioritized cluster as prioritized review candidates to solicit verification or correction feedback from a human subject matter expert (SME) for inclusion in an accepted training set. 18. The information handling system of claim 17, where analyzing the one or more clusters comprises computing a verification score for each cluster as a confidence metric which quantifies how likely that annotations in the cluster are true positives based on a training model for the feature set of a given annotation cluster. 19. The information handling system of claim 17, where analyzing the one or more clusters comprises computing a verification score for each cluster as an Inter Annotator Agreement (IAA) score measuring how consistent annotations of the human SME are with annotations from a group of human SMEs for a given annotation cluster. 20. The information handling system of claim 17, where analyzing the one or more clusters comprises computing a verification score for each cluster as a cluster size score measuring a given annotation cluster. 21. The information handling system of claim 17, where analyzing the one or more clusters comprises computing a verification score for each cluster as a cross-validation score measuring how similar the machine-annotated training set examples are to a feature set for a given annotation cluster. 22. The information handling system of claim 17, further comprising verifying or correcting all prioritized review candidates in a cluster as a single group based on verification or correction feedback from the human subject matter expert. 23. The information handling system of claim 17, further comprising verifying or correcting prioritized review candidates in a cluster one at a time based on verification or correction feedback from the human subject matter expert.