TY - JOUR
T1 - Testing Computational Assessment of Idea Novelty in Crowdsourcing
AU - Wang, Kai
AU - Dong, Boxiang
AU - Ma, Junjie
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - In crowdsourcing ideation websites, companies can easily collect large amount of ideas. Screening through such volume of ideas is very costly and challenging, necessitating automatic approaches. It would be particularly useful to automatically evaluate idea novelty since companies commonly seek novel ideas. Four computational approaches were tested, based on Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA), Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), term frequency–inverse document frequency (TF-IDF), and Global Vectors for Word Representation (GloVe), respectively. These approaches were used on three set of ideas and the computed idea novelty scores, along with crowd evaluation, were compared with human expert evaluation. The computational methods do not differ significantly with regard to correlation coefficients with expert ratings, even though TF-IDF-based measure achieved a correlation above 0.40 in two out of the three tasks. Crowd evaluation outperforms all the computational methods. Overall, our results show that the tested computational approaches do not match human judgment well enough to replace it.
AB - In crowdsourcing ideation websites, companies can easily collect large amount of ideas. Screening through such volume of ideas is very costly and challenging, necessitating automatic approaches. It would be particularly useful to automatically evaluate idea novelty since companies commonly seek novel ideas. Four computational approaches were tested, based on Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA), Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), term frequency–inverse document frequency (TF-IDF), and Global Vectors for Word Representation (GloVe), respectively. These approaches were used on three set of ideas and the computed idea novelty scores, along with crowd evaluation, were compared with human expert evaluation. The computational methods do not differ significantly with regard to correlation coefficients with expert ratings, even though TF-IDF-based measure achieved a correlation above 0.40 in two out of the three tasks. Crowd evaluation outperforms all the computational methods. Overall, our results show that the tested computational approaches do not match human judgment well enough to replace it.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85150652371&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10400419.2023.2187544
DO - 10.1080/10400419.2023.2187544
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85150652371
SN - 1040-0419
JO - Creativity Research Journal
JF - Creativity Research Journal
ER -