Linguistic resources can be populated with data through the use of such approaches as crowdsourcing and gamification when motivated people are involved. However, current crowdsourcing genre taxonomies lack the concept of cooperation, which is the principal element of modern video games and may potentially drive the annotators’ interest. This survey on crowdsourcing taxonomies and cooperation in linguistic resources provides recommendations on using cooperation in existent genres of crowdsourcing and an evidence of the efficiency of cooperation using a popular Russian linguistic resource created through crowdsourcing as an example.
Many studies following the early ones are focused on classification of whether a crowdsourced project belongs to a specific class of the given taxonomy. For instance, study of correlation between crowdsourcing genres @cite_6 , quality assessment @cite_10 , and guidelines on corpus annotation through crowdsourcing @cite_5 align various best practices among the established genres.
@cite_5 @cite_10 @cite_6
172170795 2296107862 2056584528 31535402
Crowdsourcing is an emerging collaborative approach that can be used for the acquisition of annotated corpora and a wide range of other linguistic resources. Although the use of this approach is intensifying in all its key genres (paid-for crowdsourcing, games with a purpose, volunteering-based approaches), the community still lacks a set of best-practice guidelines similar to the annotation best practices for traditional, expert-based corpus acquisition. In this paper we focus on the use of crowdsourcing methods for corpus acquisition and propose a set of best practice guidelines based in our own experiences in this area and an overview of related literature. We also introduce GATE Crowd, a plugin of the GATE platform that relies on these guidelines and offers tool support for using crowdsourcing in a more principled and efficient manner. In modern practice, labeling a dataset often involves aggregating annotator judgments obtained from crowdsourcing. State-of-theart aggregation is performed via inference on probabilistic models, some of which are dataaware, meaning that they leverage features of the data (e.g., words in a document) in addition to annotator judgments. Previous work largely prefers discriminatively trained conditional models. This paper demonstrates that a data-aware crowdsourcing model incorporating a generative multinomial data model enjoys a strong competitive advantage over its discriminative log-linear counterpart in the typical crowdsourcing setting. That is, the generative approach is better except when the annotators are highly accurate in which case simple majority vote is often sufficient. Additionally, we present a novel mean-field variational inference algorithm for the generative model that significantly improves on the previously reported state-of-the-art for that model. We validate our conclusions on six text classification datasets with both human-generated and synthetic annotations. Crowdsourcing has emerged as a new method for obtaining annotations for training models for machine learning. While many variants of this process exist, they largely differ in their methods of motivating subjects to contribute and the scale of their applications. To date, there has yet to be a study that helps the practitioner to decide what form an annotation application should take to best reach its objectives within the constraints of a project. To fill this gap, we provide a faceted analysis of crowdsourcing from a practitioner's perspective, and show how our facets apply to existing published crowdsourced annotation applications. We then summarize how the major crowdsourcing genres fill different parts of this multi-dimensional space, which leads to our recommendations on the potential opportunities crowdsourcing offers to future annotation efforts. In this paper we look into the use of crowdsourcing as a means to handle Linked Data quality problems that are challenging to be solved automatically. We analyzed the most common errors encountered in Linked Data sources and classified them according to the extent to which they are likely to be amenable to a specific form of crowdsourcing. Based on this analysis, we implemented a quality assessment methodology for Linked Data that leverages the wisdom of the crowds in different ways: (i) a contest targeting an expert crowd of researchers and Linked Data enthusiasts; complemented by (ii) paid microtasks published on Amazon Mechanical Turk.We empirically evaluated how this methodology could efficiently spot quality issues in DBpedia. We also investigated how the contributions of the two types of crowds could be optimally integrated into Linked Data curation processes. The results show that the two styles of crowdsourcing are complementary and that crowdsourcing-enabled quality assessment is a promising and affordable way to enhance the quality of Linked Data.