The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CrowdDB: answering queries with crowdsourcing
Open accessAbstract
Some queries cannot be answered by machines only. Processing such queries requires human input for providing information that is missing from the database, for performing computationally difficult functions, and for matching, ranking, or aggregating results based on fuzzy criteria. CrowdDB uses human input via crowdsourcing to process queries that neither database systems nor search engines can adequately answer. It uses SQL both as a language for posing complex queries and as a way to model data. While CrowdDB leverages many aspects of traditional database systems, there are also important differences. Conceptually, a major change is that the traditional closed-world assumption for query processing does not hold for human input. From an implementation perspective, human-oriented query operators are needed to solicit, integrate and cleanse crowdsourced data. Furthermore, performance and cost depend on a number of new factors including worker affinity, training, fatigue, motivation and location. We describe the design of CrowdDB, report on an initial set of experiments using Amazon Mechanical Turk, and outline important avenues for future work in the development of crowdsourced query processing systems.
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
Introduction to information retrieval
(2009) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.46-2715 · Cited by 12,278
Soylent: a word processor with a crowd inside
Bernstein, M. S., Little, G., Miller, R. C., Hartmann, B., Ackerman, M. S., Karger, D. R., Crowell, D., & Panovich, K. (2010) · Proceedings of the 23nd annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology · doi:10.1145/1866029.1866078 · Cited by 686
Cited by
Kittur, A., Nickerson, J. V., Bernstein, M., Gerber, E., Shaw, A., Zimmerman, J., Lease, M., & Horton, J. (2013) · Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work · doi:10.1145/2441776.2441923 · Cited by 1,034
The cultural work of microwork
Irani, L. (2015) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444813511926 · Cited by 568
Truth inference in crowdsourcing: is the problem solved?
Zheng, Y., Li, G., Li, Y., Shan, C., & Cheng, R. (2017) · Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment · doi:10.14778/3055540.3055547 · Cited by 421
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
Self-citationHybrid entity clustering using crowds and data
Lee, J., Cho, H., Park, J.-W., Cha, Y.-R., Hwang, S.-W., Nie, Z., & Wen, J.-R. (2013) · The VLDB Journal · doi:10.1007/s00778-013-0328-8 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Franklin, M. J., Kossmann, D., Kraska, T., Ramesh, S., & Xin, R.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of data
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2011-06-12
- Pages
- 61-72
- ISSN
- 0730-8078 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2168144930
- Cited by
- 623
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 63.01
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: CrowdDB: answering queries with crowdsourcing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1989323.1989331
- The paper
- Franklin, M. J., Kossmann, D., Kraska, T., Ramesh, S., & Xin, R. (2011). CrowdDB: answering queries with crowdsourcing. Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of data. https://doi.org/10.1145/1989323.1989331
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.