skip to main content
10.1145/2479832.2479844acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesk-capConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Finding action dependencies using the crowd

Published:23 June 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Training intelligent systems is a time-consuming and costly process that often limits real-world applications. Prior work has attempted to compensate for this challenge by generating sets of labeled training data for machine learning algorithms using affordable human contributors. In this paper, we present ARchitect, a system that uses the crowd to extract context-dependent relational structure. We focus on activity recognition because of its broad applicability, high level of variation, and difficulty of training systems a priority. We demonstrate that using our approach, the crowd can accurately and consistently identify relationships between actions even over sessions containing different workers and varied executions of an activity. This results in the ability to identify multiple valid execution paths from a single observation, suggesting that one-off learning can be facilitated by using the crowd as an on-demand source of human intelligence in the knowledge acquisition process.

References

  1. M. S. Bernstein, J. R. Brandt, R. C. Miller, and D. R. Karger. Crowds in two seconds: Enabling realtime crowd-powered interfaces. In Proc. of UIST ?11, p.33?42, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. M. S. Bernstein, G. Little, R. C. Miller, B. Hartmann, M. S. Ackerman, D. R. Karger, D. Crowell, and K. Panovich. Soylent: a word processor with a crowd inside. In Proc. of UIST ?10, p.313?322, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. J. P. Bigham, C. Jayant, H. Ji, G. Little, A. Miller, R. C. Miller, R. Miller, A. Tatarowicz, B. White, S. White, and T. Yeh. Vizwiz: nearly real-time answers to visual questions. In Proc. of UIST ?10, p.333?342, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. L. B. Chilton, G. Little, D. Edge, D. S. Weld, and J. A. Landay. Cascade: Crowdsourcing taxonomy creation. In Proc. of CHI ?13, To Appear, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. G. Demartini, B. Trushkowsky, T. Kraska, and M. Franklin. CrowdQ: Crowdsourced query understanding. In Proc. of CIDR ?13, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. W. S. Lasecki, Y. C. Song, H. Kautz, and J. P. Bigham. Real-Time Crowd Labeling for Deployable Activity Recognition. In Proc. of CSCW ?13, p.1203?1212, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. L. von Ahn and L. Dabbish. Labeling images with a computer game. In Proceedings of the conf. on Human factors in computing systems, CHI ?04, p.319?326, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Finding action dependencies using the crowd

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      K-CAP '13: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on Knowledge capture
      June 2013
      160 pages
      ISBN:9781450321020
      DOI:10.1145/2479832

      Copyright © 2013 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s)

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 23 June 2013

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • poster

      Acceptance Rates

      K-CAP '13 Paper Acceptance Rate13of60submissions,22%Overall Acceptance Rate55of198submissions,28%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader