Modern NLP systems require high-quality annotated data. In specialized domains, expert annotations may be prohibitively expensive. An alternative is to rely on crowdsourcing to reduce costs at the risk of introducing noise. In this paper we demonstrate that directly modeling instance difficulty can be used to improve model performance, and to route instances to appropriate annotators. Our difficulty prediction model combines two learned representations: a universal' encoder trained on out-of-domain data, and a task-specific encoder. Experiments on a complex biomedical information extraction task using expert and lay annotators show that: (i) simply excluding from the training data instances predicted to be difficult yields a small boost in performance; (ii) using difficulty scores to weight instances during training provides further, consistent gains; (iii) assigning instances predicted to be difficult to domain experts is an effective strategy for task routing. Our experiments confirm the expectation that for specialized tasks expert annotations are higher quality than crowd labels, and hence preferable to obtain if practical. Moreover, augmenting small amounts of expert data with a larger set of lay annotations leads to further improvements in model performance.
Obtaining labels can be expensive or time-consuming, but unlabeled data is often abundant and easier to obtain. Most learning tasks can be made more efficient, in terms of labeling cost, by intelligently choosing specific unlabeled instances to be labeled by an oracle. The general problem of optimally choosing these instances is known as active learning. As it is usually set in the context of supervised learning, active learning relies on a single oracle playing the role of a teacher. We focus on the multiple annotator scenario where an oracle, who knows the ground truth, no longer exists; instead, multiple labelers, with varying expertise, are available for querying. This paradigm posits new challenges to the active learning scenario. We can now ask which data sample should be labeled next and which annotator should be queried to benefit our learning model the most. In this paper, we employ a probabilistic model for learning from multiple annotators that can also learn the annotator expertise even when their expertise may not be consistently accurate across the task domain. We then focus on providing a criterion and formulation that allows us to select both a sample and the annotator s to query the labels from. Proactive learning is a generalization of active learning designed to relax unrealistic assumptions and thereby reach practical applications. Active learning seeks to select the most informative unlabeled instances and ask an omniscient oracle for their labels, so as to retrain the learning algorithm maximizing accuracy. However, the oracle is assumed to be infallible (never wrong), indefatigable (always answers), individual (only one oracle), and insensitive to costs (always free or always charges the same). Proactive learning relaxes all four of these assumptions, relying on a decision-theoretic approach to jointly select the optimal oracle and instance, by casting the problem as a utility optimization problem subject to a budget constraint. Results on multi-oracle optimization over several data sets demonstrate the superiority of our approach over the single-imperfect-oracle baselines in most cases. The active learning (AL) framework is an increasingly popular strategy for reducing the amount of human labeling effort required to induce a predictive model. Most work in AL has assumed that a single, infallible oracle provides labels requested by the learner at a fixed cost. However, real-world applications suitable for AL often include multiple domain experts who provide labels of varying cost and quality. We explore this multiple expert active learning (MEAL) scenario and develop a novel algorithm for instance allocation that exploits the meta-cognitive abilities of novice (cheap) experts in order to make the best use of the experienced (expensive) annotators. We demonstrate that this strategy outperforms strong baseline approaches to MEAL on both a sentiment analysis dataset and two datasets from our motivating application of biomedical citation screening. Furthermore, we provide evidence that novice labelers are often aware of which instances they are likely to mislabel. This paper addresses the repeated acquisition of labels for data items when the labeling is imperfect. We examine the improvement (or lack thereof) in data quality via repeated labeling, and focus especially on the improvement of training labels for supervised induction. With the outsourcing of small tasks becoming easier, for example via Rent-A-Coder or Amazon's Mechanical Turk, it often is possible to obtain less-than-expert labeling at low cost. With low-cost labeling, preparing the unlabeled part of the data can become considerably more expensive than labeling. We present repeated-labeling strategies of increasing complexity, and show several main results. (i) Repeated-labeling can improve label quality and model quality, but not always. (ii) When labels are noisy, repeated labeling can be preferable to single labeling even in the traditional setting where labels are not particularly cheap. (iii) As soon as the cost of processing the unlabeled data is not free, even the simple strategy of labeling everything multiple times can give considerable advantage. (iv) Repeatedly labeling a carefully chosen set of points is generally preferable, and we present a robust technique that combines different notions of uncertainty to select data points for which quality should be improved. The bottom line: the results show clearly that when labeling is not perfect, selective acquisition of multiple labels is a strategy that data miners should have in their repertoire; for certain label-quality cost regimes, the benefit is substantial. We consider a finite-pool data categorization scenario which requires exhaustively classifying a given set of examples with a limited budget. We adopt a hybrid human-machine approach which blends automatic machine learning with human labeling across a tiered workforce composed of domain experts and crowd workers. To effectively achieve high-accuracy labels over the instances in the pool at minimal cost, we develop a novel approach based on decision-theoretic active learning. On the important task of biomedical citation screening for systematic reviews, results on real data show that our method achieves consistent improvements over baseline strategies. To foster further research by others, we have made our data available online.