Paper detail

Crowd & Prejudice: An Impossibility Theorem for Crowd Labelling without a Gold Standard

A common use of crowd sourcing is to obtain labels for a dataset. Several algorithms have been proposed to identify uninformative members of the crowd so that their labels can be disregarded and the cost of paying them avoided. One common motivation of these algorithms is to try and do without any initial set of trusted labeled data. We analyse this class of algorithms as mechanisms in a game-theoretic setting to understand the incentives they create for workers. We find an impossibility result that without any ground truth, and when workers have access to commonly shared 'prejudices' upon which they agree but are not informative of true labels, there is always equilibria where all agents report the prejudice. A small amount amount of gold standard data is found to be sufficient to rule out these equilibria.

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.