Annotation Probability Distribution for Crowdsourced Data Bias

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Traditional active-learning techniques in crowdsourcing assume reliable annotators and fail to account for annotation bias and interference between data items, leading to degraded quality of annotated data and services.

Innovation Solution

A system that calculates an annotation probability distribution using a factor-graph model to select subsets of comments for annotation, leveraging annotation bias to improve the accuracy of annotations and reduce errors in classifiers.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If traditional active-learning techniques are used in crowdsourcing, then annotation costs are reduced, but annotation quality deteriorates due to annotation bias and interference between data items

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveannotation costVSAvoidannotation quality
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary analysis of annotation bias patterns from historical data before selecting new data for annotation. By pre-computing annotation probability distributions and identifying biased annotators or batches, the system proactively avoids selecting data that would suffer from known annotation biases, thus preventing quality degradation before it occurs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback loops where annotation results are continuously analyzed to update the annotation probability distribution model. This feedback mechanism allows the system to learn from past annotation biases and adjust future data selection strategies, improving annotation quality while maintaining cost efficiency through iterative refinement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Productivity

If batches of multiple data items are annotated simultaneously to reduce costs, then annotation efficiency increases, but annotation accuracy decreases due to interference between data items

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveannotation efficiencyVSAvoidannotation accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments batches of data items into smaller sub-batches based on the computed annotation probability distribution. By dividing large batches into smaller groups with lower interference risk, the system maintains annotation efficiency while reducing the negative impact of inter-item interference on annotation accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies different annotation strategies to different segments of data based on local characteristics identified through the annotation probability distribution. High-risk segments with high interference potential receive more careful handling or smaller batch sizes, while low-risk segments can be processed in larger batches, optimizing both efficiency and accuracy locally.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Device complexity

If annotation bias is not accounted for, then annotation process is simpler, but classifier performance deteriorates due to degraded annotated data quality

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveannotation process complexityVSAvoidclassifier performance
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system introduces an intermediary annotation probability distribution model that sits between the raw annotation process and the classifier training. This intermediary layer computes and weights annotations based on learned bias patterns, correcting annotation quality issues without requiring fundamental changes to the annotation process itself, thus maintaining simplicity while improving reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS9665551B2Leveraging annotation bias to improve annotations
Publication Date: 2017.05.30 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC
  • US9665551B2 patent drawing
  • US9665551B2 patent drawing
  • US9665551B2 patent drawing

AI summary

In order to leverage annotation bias in batch annotations, obtained via crowdsourcing, on a set of comments on user posts in a social network, a system may select a subset of the comments for annotation based on how informative expected annotations for the comments in the subset are for the one or more classifiers and probabilities of occurrence of the expected annotations based on a predetermined annotation probability distribution. Note that the classifier may predict how likely the expected annotations are accurate for the comments in a given subset. Moreover, the predetermined annotation probability distribution may specify the annotation bias. In this way, the system may use the annotation bias to select the subset that is likely to receive expected annotations and, thus, are that are easier to use in training the classifier.