How Many Workers to Ask?

Abstract

Crowdsourcing has been part of the IR toolbox as a cheap and fast mechanism to obtain labels for system development and evaluation. Successful deployment of crowdsourcing at scale involves adjusting many variables, a very important one being the number of workers needed per human intelligence task (HIT). We consider the crowdsourcing task of learning the answer to simple multiple-choice HITs, which are representative of many relevance experiments. In order to provide statistically significant results, one often needs to ask multiple workers to answer the same HIT. A stopping rule is an algorithm that, given a HIT, decides for any given set of worker answers to stop and output an answer or iterate and ask one more worker. In contrast to other solutions that try to estimate worker performance and answer at the same time, our approach assumes the historical performance of a worker is known and tries to estimate the HIT difficulty and answer at the same time. The difficulty of the HIT decides how much weight to give to each worker's answer. In this paper we investigate how to devise better stopping rules given workers' performance quality scores. We suggest adaptive exploration as a promising approach for scalable and automatic creation of ground truth. We conduct a data analysis on an industrial crowdsourcing platform, and use the observations from this analysis to design new stopping rules that use the workers' quality scores in a non-trivial manner. We then perform a number of experiments using real-world datasets and simulated data, showing that our algorithm performs better than other approaches.