众包数据的算法改进:内在质量度量、局部最优和共识

Thomas C. van Dijk, Norbert Fischer, Bernhard Häussner
{"title":"众包数据的算法改进:内在质量度量、局部最优和共识","authors":"Thomas C. van Dijk, Norbert Fischer, Bernhard Häussner","doi":"10.1145/3397536.3422260","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Raw crowdsourced data is often of questionable quality. The typical solution to this is redundancy: ask multiple independent participants the same question and take some form of majority answer. However, this can be wasteful in terms of human effort. In this paper we show that algorithmic analysis of the data is able to get higher quality results out of a given amount of crowd effort (or alternatively, that less crowd effort would have sufficed for the same level of quality). Our case study is based on a publicly available crowdsourced data set by the New York Public Library, featuring building footprints in historical insurance atlases. Besides evaluating the quality improvement achieved by our methods, we provide both a command line interface for batch-mode processing and an interactive web interface; both work with standard data formats and are available as open source software.","PeriodicalId":233918,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems","volume":"52 357 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Algorithmic Improvement of Crowdsourced Data: Intrinsic Quality Measures, Local Optima, and Consensus\",\"authors\":\"Thomas C. van Dijk, Norbert Fischer, Bernhard Häussner\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3397536.3422260\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Raw crowdsourced data is often of questionable quality. The typical solution to this is redundancy: ask multiple independent participants the same question and take some form of majority answer. However, this can be wasteful in terms of human effort. In this paper we show that algorithmic analysis of the data is able to get higher quality results out of a given amount of crowd effort (or alternatively, that less crowd effort would have sufficed for the same level of quality). Our case study is based on a publicly available crowdsourced data set by the New York Public Library, featuring building footprints in historical insurance atlases. Besides evaluating the quality improvement achieved by our methods, we provide both a command line interface for batch-mode processing and an interactive web interface; both work with standard data formats and are available as open source software.\",\"PeriodicalId\":233918,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems\",\"volume\":\"52 357 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3397536.3422260\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3397536.3422260","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

原始的众包数据通常质量有问题。典型的解决方案是冗余:向多个独立的参与者询问相同的问题,并采取某种形式的多数答案。然而,就人力而言,这可能是浪费。在本文中,我们展示了数据的算法分析能够从给定数量的人群努力中获得更高质量的结果(或者,更少的人群努力就足以达到相同的质量水平)。我们的案例研究基于纽约公共图书馆公开的众包数据集,在历史保险地图集中展示了建筑足迹。除了评估我们的方法所实现的质量改进之外,我们还提供了用于批处理模式处理的命令行界面和交互式web界面;两者都使用标准的数据格式,并且可以作为开源软件获得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Algorithmic Improvement of Crowdsourced Data: Intrinsic Quality Measures, Local Optima, and Consensus
Raw crowdsourced data is often of questionable quality. The typical solution to this is redundancy: ask multiple independent participants the same question and take some form of majority answer. However, this can be wasteful in terms of human effort. In this paper we show that algorithmic analysis of the data is able to get higher quality results out of a given amount of crowd effort (or alternatively, that less crowd effort would have sufficed for the same level of quality). Our case study is based on a publicly available crowdsourced data set by the New York Public Library, featuring building footprints in historical insurance atlases. Besides evaluating the quality improvement achieved by our methods, we provide both a command line interface for batch-mode processing and an interactive web interface; both work with standard data formats and are available as open source software.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信