Crowdsourcing Paper Screening in Systematic Literature Reviews

Literature reviews allow scientists to stand on the shoulders of giants, showing promising directions, summarizing progress, and pointing out existing challenges in research. At the same time conducting a systematic literature review is a laborious and consequently expensive process. In the last decade, there have a few studies on crowdsourcing in literature reviews. This paper explores the feasibility of crowdsourcing for facilitating the literature review process in terms of results, time and effort, as well as to identify which crowdsourcing strategies provide the best results based on the budget available. In particular we focus on the screening phase of the literature review process and we contribute and assess methods for identifying the size of tests, labels required per paper, and classification functions as well as methods to split the crowdsourcing process in phases to improve results. Finally, we present our findings based on experiments run on Crowdflower

Optimal Crowdsourced Classification with a Reject Option in the Presence of Spammers

We explore the design of an effective crowdsourcing system for an $M$-ary classification task. Crowd workers complete simple binary microtasks whose results are aggregated to give the final decision. We consider the scenario where the workers have a reject option so that they are allowed to skip microtasks when they are unable to or choose not to respond to binary microtasks. We present an aggregation approach using a weighted majority voting rule, where each worker's response is assigned an optimized weight to maximize crowd's classification performance.Comment: submitted to ICASSP 201

Does Confidence Reporting from the Crowd Benefit Crowdsourcing Performance?

We explore the design of an effective crowdsourcing system for an $M$-ary classification task. Crowd workers complete simple binary microtasks whose results are aggregated to give the final classification decision. We consider the scenario where the workers have a reject option so that they are allowed to skip microtasks when they are unable to or choose not to respond to binary microtasks. Additionally, the workers report quantized confidence levels when they are able to submit definitive answers. We present an aggregation approach using a weighted majority voting rule, where each worker's response is assigned an optimized weight to maximize crowd's classification performance. We obtain a couterintuitive result that the classification performance does not benefit from workers reporting quantized confidence. Therefore, the crowdsourcing system designer should employ the reject option without requiring confidence reporting.Comment: 6 pages, 4 figures, SocialSens 2017. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1602.0057