The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Online crowdsourcing: Rating annotators and obtaining cost-effective labels
Abstract
Labeling large datasets has become faster, cheaper, and easier with the advent of crowdsourcing services like Amazon Mechanical Turk. How can one trust the labels obtained from such services? We propose a model of the labeling process which includes label uncertainty, as well a multi-dimensional measure of the annotators' ability. From the model we derive an online algorithm that estimates the most likely value of the labels and the annotator abilities. It finds and prioritizes experts when requesting labels, and actively excludes unreliable annotators. Based on labels already obtained, it dynamically chooses which images will be labeled next, and how many labels to request in order to achieve a desired level of confidence. Our algorithm is general and can handle binary, multi-valued, and continuous annotations (e.g. bounding boxes). Experiments on a dataset containing more than 50,000 labels show that our algorithm reduces the number of labels required, and thus the total cost of labeling, by a large factor while keeping error rates low on a variety of datasets.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Observer Error-Rates Using the EM Algorithm
Dawid, A. P., & Skene, A. M. (1979) · Applied Statistics · doi:10.2307/2346806 · Cited by 1,623
Cited by
Crowdsourced Data Management: A Survey
Li, G., Wang, J., Zheng, Y., & Franklin, M. J. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2016.2535242 · Cited by 283
Approaches to automated detection of cyberbullying: A survey
Salawu, S., He, Y., & Lumsden, J. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing · doi:10.1109/taffc.2017.2761757 · Cited by 258
Learning from crowdsourced labeled data: a survey
Zhang, J., Wu, X., & Sheng, V. S. (2016) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-016-9491-9 · Cited by 203
Knowledge Learning With Crowdsourcing: A Brief Review and Systematic Perspective
Zhang, J. (2022) · IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica · doi:10.1109/jas.2022.105434 · Cited by 66
Active and semi-supervised learning for object detection with imperfect data
Rhee, P. K., Erdenee, E., Kyun, S. D., Ahmed, M. U., & Jin, S. (2017) · Cognitive Systems Research · doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2017.05.006 · Cited by 55
Metadata
- Authors
- Welinder, P., & Perona, P.
- Venue
- 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition - Workshops
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2010-06
- Pages
- 25-32
- ISSN
- 2160-7508 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2164124780
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.98
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Online crowdsourcing: Rating annotators and obtaining cost-effective labels. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/cvprw.2010.5543189
- The paper
- Welinder, P., & Perona, P. (2010). Online crowdsourcing: Rating annotators and obtaining cost-effective labels. 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition - Workshops. https://doi.org/10.1109/cvprw.2010.5543189
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.