Papers › Ballpark Crowdsourcing: The Wisdom of Rough Group Comparisons
Ballpark Crowdsourcing: The Wisdom of Rough Group Comparisons
Tom Hope, Dafna Shahaf
Crowdsourcing has become a popular method for collecting labeled training data. However, in many practical scenarios traditional labeling can be difficult for crowdworkers (for example, if the data is high-dimensional or unintuitive, or the labels are continuous). In this work, we develop a novel model for crowdsourcing that can complement standard practices by exploiting people's intuitions about groups and relations between them. We employ a recent machine learning setting, called Ballpark Learning, that can estimate individual labels given only coarse, aggregated signal over groups of data points. To address the important case of continuous labels, we extend the Ballpark setting (which focused on classification) to regression problems. We formulate the problem as a convex optimization problem and propose fast, simple methods with an innate robustness to outliers. We evaluate our methods on real-world datasets, demonstrating how useful constraints about groups can be harnessed from a crowd of non-experts. Our methods can rival supervised models trained on many true labels, and can obtain considerably better results from the crowd than a standard label-collection process (for a lower price). By collecting rough guesses on groups of instances and using machine learning to infer the individual labels, our lightweight framework is able to address core crowdsourcing challenges and train machine learning models in a cost-effective way.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections