Paper detail

Comprehensive and Reliable Crowd Assessment Algorithms

Evaluating workers is a critical aspect of any crowdsourcing system. In this paper, we devise techniques for evaluating workers by finding confidence intervals on their error rates. Unlike prior work, we focus on "conciseness"---that is, giving as tight a confidence interval as possible. Conciseness is of utmost importance because it allows us to be sure that we have the best guarantee possible on worker error rate. Also unlike prior work, we provide techniques that work under very general scenarios, such as when not all workers have attempted every task (a fairly common scenario in practice), when tasks have non-boolean responses, and when workers have different biases for positive and negative tasks. We demonstrate conciseness as well as accuracy of our confidence intervals by testing them on a variety of conditions and multiple real-world datasets.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.