3.8 Proceedings Paper

Task Matching and Scheduling for Multiple Workers in Spatial Crowdsourcing

出版社

ASSOC COMPUTING MACHINERY
DOI: 10.1145/2820783.2820831

关键词

spatial crowdsourcing; task matching and scheduling; scalability

资金

  1. NSF [IIS-1320149, CNS-1461963]
  2. USC Integrated Media Systems Center (IMSC)
  3. DARPA [W911NF-12-1-0034]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new platform, termed spatial crowdsourcing, is emerging which enables a requester to commission workers to physically travel to some specified locations to perform a set of spatial tasks (i.e., tasks related to a geographical location and time). The current approach is to formulate spatial crowdsourcing as a matching problem between tasks and workers; hence the primary objective of the existing solutions is to maximize the number of matched tasks. Our goal is to solve the spatial crowdsourcing problem in the presence of multiple workers where we optimize for both travel cost and the number of completed tasks, while taking the tasks' expiration times into consideration. The challenge is that the solution should be a mixture of task-matching and task-scheduling, which are fundamentally different. In this paper, we show that a baseline approach that performs a task-matching first, and subsequently schedules the tasks assigned per worker in a following phase, does not perform well. Hence, we add a third phase in which we iterate back to the matching phase to improve the assignment per the output of the scheduling phase, and thus further improves the quality of matching and scheduling. Even though this 3-phase approach generates high quality results, it is very slow and does not scale. Hence, to scale our algorithm to large number of workers and tasks, we propose a Bisection-based framework which recursively divides all the workers and tasks into different partitions such that assignment and scheduling can be performed locally in a much smaller and promising space. Our experiments show that this approach is three orders of magnitude faster than the 3-phase approach while it only sacrifices 4% of the results' quality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据