4.7 Article

Task Assignment on Multi-Skill Oriented Spatial Crowdsourcing

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE AND DATA ENGINEERING
Volume 28, Issue 8, Pages 2201-2215

Publisher

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/TKDE.2016.2550041

Keywords

Multi-skill spatial crowdsourcing; greedy algorithm; g-divide-and-conquer algorithm; cost-model-based adaptive algorithm

Funding

  1. Hong Kong RGC Project [N HKUST637/13]
  2. NSFC Guang Dong Grant [U1301253]
  3. National Grand Fundamental Research 973 Program of China [2014CB340303]
  4. Microsoft Research Asia Gift Grant
  5. Google Faculty Award 2013
  6. NSFC [61325013, 61572396, 61373175]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

With the rapid development of mobile devices and crowdsourcing platforms, the spatial crowdsourcing has attracted much attention from the database community. Specifically, the spatial crowdsourcing refers to sending location-based requests to workers, based on their current positions. In this paper, we consider a spatial crowdsourcing scenario, in which each worker has a set of qualified skills, whereas each spatial task (e.g., repairing a house, decorating a room, and performing entertainment shows for a ceremony) is time-constrained, under the budget constraint, and required a set of skills. Under this scenario, we will study an important problem, namely multi-skill spatial crowdsourcing (MS-SC), which finds an optimal worker-and-task assignment strategy, such that skills between workers and tasks match with each other, and workers' benefits are maximized under the budget constraint. We prove that the MS-SC problem is NP-hard and intractable. Therefore, we propose three effective heuristic approaches, including greedy, g-divide-and-conquer and cost-model-based adaptive algorithms to get worker-and-task assignments. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate the efficiency and effectiveness of our MS-SC processing approaches on both real and synthetic data sets.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available