Paper Reading #6: TurKit: Human Computation Algorithms on Mechanical Turk

Reference
Author: Greg Little(student), Lydia B. Chilton(Computer Science grad student)*, Max Goldman(grad student), Robert C. Miller(Associate Professor)
Affiliation: MIT CSAIL and University of Washington* respectively
Presentation: UIST’10, October 3–6, 2010, New York, New York, USA
Summary
Hypothesis
The paper presents the crash-and- rerun programming model that makes TurKit possible, along with a variety of applications for human computation algorithms. The paper hypothesizes that TurKit allows the programmer to think about algorithmic tasks as simple straight-line imperative programs, where calls to MTurk appear as ordinary function calls.It also hypothesizes that the crash-and-rerun programming makes it cheap to rerun the entire program up to the place it crashed, if our program crashes, since local computation is cheap. Other benefits that were hypothesized include incremental programming, easy implementation, retroactive print line debugging.
Methods
TurKit was used in implementation of various application like iterative writing( one turker writes a paragraph with a goal, and subsequent turkers try to improve upon the paragraph),blurry text( new guesses as to the blurred text's meaning are added and changed) recognition,decision theory experimentation(simulate human decision making in a random guessing scenario) and pyschophysics experimentation. Different case studies were also done to show the results of the application.
Results
Results claim that the programming model is good for prototyping algorithmic tasks on MTurk, and that it sacrifices efficiency for programming usability.Users were unclear about which aspects of a TurKit script were stored in the execution trace, and which parts could be modified or re-ordered while others were unaware of the parallelism feature.
People tend to keep to the original style and formatting while working on paragraphs. In the blurry text recognition the final result was nearly perfect. In the decision theory experimentation TurKit was useful in coordinating the iterative nature of the process, but not necessarily very good at simulating actual human behavior. It was effective in the area of psychophysics experimentation, since calls to MTurk were embedded within a larger application.
Discussion
I feel indifferent about the results and experiment with TurKit. The idea to not execute certain sets of instructions but get to the point of last execution to run the program seems promising but might be limited to some basic forms of programming only. I am not really sure how MTurk works, so I would not really understand the effect the tool will have. As users were not aware of the parallelism feature and never really explored it to fullest, I feel like a lot of useful feedback was left out as the functionality was not tested to its fullest.
Comments
Post a Comment