Visual question answering (VQA) systems are emerging from a desire to empower users to ask any natural language question about visual content and receive a valid answer in response. However, close examination of the VQA problem reveals an unavoidable, entangled problem that multiple humans may or may not always agree on a single answer to a visual question. We train a model to automatically predict from a visual question whether a crowd would agree on a single answer. We then propose how to exploit this system in a novel application to efficiently allocate human effort to collect answers to visual questions. Specifically, we propose a crowdsourcing system that automatically solicits fewer human responses when answer agreement is expected and more human responses when answer disagreement is expected. Our system improves upon existing crowdsourcing systems, typically eliminating at least 20 of human effort with no loss to the information collected from the crowd.
* Analyses of Crowd Disagreement More broadly, our work relates to efforts to account for crowd disagreement. For example, researchers have suggested ways to resolve crowd disagreement due to task difficulty @cite_23 and ambiguity specificity @cite_10 @cite_11 . Some methods demonstrate which workers to trust most when aggregating multiple responses into a final, single response @cite_19 @cite_23 . Other methods leverage context to automatically disambiguate which of multiple outcomes is the desired outcome @cite_11 . Unlike prior work, we focus on the task of visual question answering. Moreover, while prior work focuses on resolving specific sources of crowd disagreement (e.g., task difficulty or ambiguity), we instead propose a single, integrated system that jointly detects various sources of crowd disagreement that arise for visual question answering. The advantage of this approach is to separate easy to answer" instances from all instances that would require additional effort to resolve the disagreement; e.g., collect multiple answers for ambiguous and subjective tasks or apply an aggregation scheme to produce a single answer from multiple answers when crowd workers are unreliable.
@cite_19 @cite_10 @cite_23 @cite_11
1543648998 2149273804 1859119539
Visual question answering systems empower users to ask any question about any image and receive a valid answer. However, existing systems do not yet account for the fact that a visual question can lead to a single answer or multiple different answers. While a crowd often agrees, disagreements do arise for many reasons including that visual questions are ambiguous, subjective, or difficult. We propose a model, CrowdVerge, for automatically predicting from a visual question whether a crowd would agree on one answer. We then propose how to exploit these predictions in a novel application to efficiently collect all valid answers to visual questions. Specifically, we solicit fewer human responses when answer agreement is expected and more human responses otherwise. Experiments on 121,811 visual questions asked by sighted and blind people show that, compared to existing crowdsourcing systems, our system captures the same answer diversity with typically 14-23 less crowd involvement. Blind people face a range of accessibility challenges in their everyday lives, from reading the text on a package of food to traveling independently in a new place. Answering general questions about one's visual surroundings remains well beyond the capabilities of fully automated systems, but recent systems are showing the potential of engaging on-demand human workers (the crowd) to answer visual questions. The input to such systems has generally been a single image, which can limit the interaction with a worker to one question; or video streams where systems have paired the end user with a single worker, limiting the benefits of the crowd. In this paper, we introduce Chorus:View, a system that assists users over the course of longer interactions by engaging workers in a continuous conversation with the user about a video stream from the user's mobile device. We demonstrate the benefit of using multiple crowd workers instead of just one in terms of both latency and accuracy, then conduct a study with 10 blind users that shows Chorus:View answers common visual questions more quickly and accurately than existing approaches. We conclude with a discussion of users' feedback and potential future work on interactive crowd support of blind users. Cognitive computing systems require human labeled data for evaluation and often for training. The standard practice used in gathering this data minimizes disagreement between annotators, and we have found this results in data that fails to account for the ambiguity inherent in language. We have proposed the CrowdTruth method for collecting ground truth through crowdsourcing, which reconsiders the role of people in machine learning based on the observation that disagreement between annotators provides a useful signal for phenomena such as ambiguity in the text. We report on using this method to build an annotated data set for medical relation extraction for the cause and treat relations, and how this data performed in a supervised training experiment. We demonstrate that by modeling ambiguity, labeled data gathered from crowd workers can (1) reach the level of quality of domain experts for this task while reducing the cost, and (2) provide better training data at scale than distant supervision. We further propose and validate new weighted measures for precision, recall, and F-measure, which account for ambiguity in both human and machine performance on this task. Despite decades of research attempting to establish conversational interaction between humans and computers, the capabilities of automated conversational systems are still limited. In this paper, we introduce Chorus, a crowd-powered conversational assistant. When using Chorus, end users converse continuously with what appears to be a single conversational partner. Behind the scenes, Chorus leverages multiple crowd workers to propose and vote on responses. A shared memory space helps the dynamic crowd workforce maintain consistency, and a game-theoretic incentive mechanism helps to balance their efforts between proposing and voting. Studies with 12 end users and 100 crowd workers demonstrate that Chorus can provide accurate, topical responses, answering nearly 93 of user queries appropriately, and staying on-topic in over 95 of responses. We also observed that Chorus has advantages over pairing an end user with a single crowd worker and end users completing their own tasks in terms of speed, quality, and breadth of assistance. Chorus demonstrates a new future in which conversational assistants are made usable in the real world by combining human and machine intelligence, and may enable a useful new way of interacting with the crowds powering other systems.