ResearchTrend.AI
  • Papers
  • Communities
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Pricing
Papers
Communities
Social Events
Terms and Conditions
Pricing
Parameter LabParameter LabTwitterGitHubLinkedInBlueskyYoutube

© 2025 ResearchTrend.AI, All rights reserved.

  1. Home
  2. Papers
  3. 2305.20042
16
11

Crowdsourcing subjective annotations using pairwise comparisons reduces bias and error compared to the majority-vote method

31 May 2023
Hasti Narimanzadeh
Arash Badie-Modiri
Iuliia Smirnova
T. H. Chen
ArXivPDFHTML
Abstract

How to better reduce measurement variability and bias introduced by subjectivity in crowdsourced labelling remains an open question. We introduce a theoretical framework for understanding how random error and measurement bias enter into crowdsourced annotations of subjective constructs. We then propose a pipeline that combines pairwise comparison labelling with Elo scoring, and demonstrate that it outperforms the ubiquitous majority-voting method in reducing both types of measurement error. To assess the performance of the labelling approaches, we constructed an agent-based model of crowdsourced labelling that lets us introduce different types of subjectivity into the tasks. We find that under most conditions with task subjectivity, the comparison approach produced higher f1f_1f1​ scores. Further, the comparison approach is less susceptible to inflating bias, which majority voting tends to do. To facilitate applications, we show with simulated and real-world data that the number of required random comparisons for the same classification accuracy scales log-linearly O(Nlog⁡N)O(N \log N)O(NlogN) with the number of labelled items. We also implemented the Elo system as an open-source Python package.

View on arXiv
Comments on this paper