Confident in the Crowd: Bayesian Inference to Improve Data Labelling in Crowdsourcing

Pierce Burke, Richard Klein
{"title":"Confident in the Crowd: Bayesian Inference to Improve Data Labelling in Crowdsourcing","authors":"Pierce Burke, Richard Klein","doi":"10.1109/SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA48453.2020.9041099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the increased interest in machine learning and big data problems, the need for large amounts of labelled data has also grown. However, it is often infeasible to get experts to label all of this data, which leads many practitioners to crowdsourcing solutions. In this paper, we present new techniques to improve the quality of the labels while attempting to reduce the cost. The naive approach to assigning labels is to adopt a majority vote method, however, in the context of data labelling, this is not always ideal as data labellers are not equally reliable. One might, instead, give higher priority to certain labellers through some kind of weighted vote based on past performance. This paper investigates the use of more sophisticated methods, such as Bayesian inference, to measure the performance of the labellers as well as the confidence of each label. The methods we propose follow an iterative improvement algorithm which attempts to use the least amount of workers necessary to achieve the desired confidence in the inferred label. This paper explores simulated binary classification problems with simulated workers and questions to test the proposed methods. Our methods outperform the standard voting methods in both cost and accuracy while maintaining higher reliability when there is disagreement within the crowd.","PeriodicalId":215514,"journal":{"name":"2020 International SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA Conference","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 International SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA48453.2020.9041099","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

With the increased interest in machine learning and big data problems, the need for large amounts of labelled data has also grown. However, it is often infeasible to get experts to label all of this data, which leads many practitioners to crowdsourcing solutions. In this paper, we present new techniques to improve the quality of the labels while attempting to reduce the cost. The naive approach to assigning labels is to adopt a majority vote method, however, in the context of data labelling, this is not always ideal as data labellers are not equally reliable. One might, instead, give higher priority to certain labellers through some kind of weighted vote based on past performance. This paper investigates the use of more sophisticated methods, such as Bayesian inference, to measure the performance of the labellers as well as the confidence of each label. The methods we propose follow an iterative improvement algorithm which attempts to use the least amount of workers necessary to achieve the desired confidence in the inferred label. This paper explores simulated binary classification problems with simulated workers and questions to test the proposed methods. Our methods outperform the standard voting methods in both cost and accuracy while maintaining higher reliability when there is disagreement within the crowd.
在人群中自信:贝叶斯推理改进众包中的数据标签
随着人们对机器学习和大数据问题的兴趣日益浓厚,对大量标记数据的需求也在增长。然而,让专家给所有这些数据贴上标签通常是不可行的,这导致许多从业者采用众包解决方案。在本文中,我们提出了新的技术,以提高标签的质量,同时试图降低成本。分配标签的朴素方法是采用多数表决法,然而,在数据标签的背景下,这并不总是理想的,因为数据标签并不同样可靠。相反,可以通过基于过去表现的某种加权投票,给予某些标签者更高的优先级。本文研究了使用更复杂的方法,如贝叶斯推理,来衡量标签器的性能以及每个标签的置信度。我们提出的方法遵循迭代改进算法,该算法试图使用最少的工作人员来实现对推断标签的期望置信度。本文探讨了模拟工人的模拟二元分类问题,并对所提出的方法进行了测试。我们的方法在成本和准确性上都优于标准投票方法,同时在人群中存在分歧时保持更高的可靠性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信