Written Justifications are Key to Aggregate Crowdsourced Forecasts
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper demonstrates that aggregating crowdsourced forecasts benefits from modeling the written justifications provided by forecasters. Our experiments show that the majority and weighted vote baselines are competitive, and that the written justifications are beneficial to call a question throughout its life except in the last quarter. We also conduct an error analysis shedding light into the characteristics that make a justification unreliable.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2021.
Builds on
12 of 52 references.
References · 12
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
- 2017Mixed Precision Trainingcited by 1,135
- 2019Persuasion for Good: Towards a Personalized Persuasive Dialogue System for Social Goodcited by 207
- 2020A Computational Approach to Understanding Empathy Expressed in Text-Based Mental Health Supportcited by 182
- 2013A Computational Approach to Politeness with Application to Social Factorscited by 104
- 2016Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discoursecited by 69
- 2018Cross-topic Argument Mining from Heterogeneous Sources Using Attention-based Neural Networkscited by 58
- 2020Measuring Forecasting Skill from Textcited by 6
- 2020Help! Need Advice on Identifying Advicecited by 6
- 2019Correlating Twitter Language with Community-Level Health Outcomescited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.