If in a Crowdsourced Data Annotation Pipeline, a GPT-4
<|reference_start|>If in a Crowdsourced Data Annotation Pipeline, a GPT-4: Recent studies indicated GPT-4 outperforms online crowd workers in data labeling accuracy, notably workers from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). However, these studies were criticized for deviating from standard crowdsourcing practices and emphasizing individual workers' performances over the whole data-annotation process. This paper compared GPT-4 and an ethical and well-executed MTurk pipeline, with 415 workers labeling 3,177 sentence segments from 200 scholarly articles using the CODA-19 scheme. Two worker interfaces yielded 127,080 labels, which were then used to infer the final labels through eight label-aggregation algorithms. Our evaluation showed that despite best practices, MTurk pipeline's highest accuracy was 81.5%, whereas GPT-4 achieved 83.6%. Interestingly, when combining GPT-4's labels with crowd labels collected via an advanced worker interface for aggregation, 2 out of the 8 algorithms achieved an even higher accuracy (87.5%, 87.0%). Further analysis suggested that, when the crowd's and GPT-4's labeling strengths are complementary, aggregating them could increase labeling accuracy.<|reference_end|>
@article{he2024if,
    title={If in a Crowdsourced Data Annotation Pipeline, a GPT-4},
    author={Zeyu He, Chieh-Yang Huang, Chien-Kuang Cornelia Ding, Shaurya Rohatgi,
  Ting-Hao 'Kenneth' Huang},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.16795},
    year={2024},
    doi={10.1145/3613904.3642834},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2402.16795},
    primaryClass={cs.HC cs.AI cs.CL cs.LG}
}