Journal Article - Futures
Accumulating Evidence Using Crowdsourcing and Machine Learning: A Living Bibliography about Existential Risk and Global Catastrophic Risk
Abstract
The study of existential risk — the risk of human extinction or the collapse of human civilization — has only recently emerged as an integrated field of research, and yet an overwhelming volume of relevant research has already been published. To provide an evidence base for policy and risk analysis, this research should be systematically reviewed. In a systematic review, one of many time-consuming tasks is to read the titles and abstracts of research publications, to see if they meet the inclusion criteria. We show how this task can be shared between multiple people (using crowdsourcing) and partially automated (using machine learning), as methods of handling an overwhelming volume of research. We used these methods to create The Existential Risk Research Assessment (TERRA), which is a living bibliography of relevant publications that gets updated each month (www.x-risk.net). We present the results from the first ten months of TERRA, in which 10,001 abstracts were screened by 51 participants. Several challenges need to be met before these methods can be used in systematic reviews. However, we suggest that collaborative and cumulative methods such as these will need to be used in systematic reviews as the volume of research increases.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via Futures.
For more information on this publication:
Please contact
International Security
For Academic Citation:
Shackelford, Gorm E, Luke Kemp, Catherine Rhodes, Lalitha Sundaram, Seán S. ÓhÉigeartaigh, Simon Beard, Haydn Belfield, Julius Weitzdörfer, Shahar Avin, Dag Sørebø, Elliot M. Jones, John B. Hume, David Price, David Pyle, Daniel Hurt, Theodore Stone, Harry Watkins, Lydia Collas, Bryony C. Cade, Thomas Frederick Johnson, Zachary Freitas-Groff, David Denkenberger, Michael Levot and William J. Sutherland. "Accumulating Evidence Using Crowdsourcing and Machine Learning: A Living Bibliography about Existential Risk and Global Catastrophic Risk." Futures, vol. 116. (February 2020).
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Journal Article
- Nonproliferation Review
Gas, Norms, and Statistics: The Jury is Still Out
Book Chapter
- Springer
Law and Policy Responses to Disaster-Induced Financial Distress
Journal Article
- Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
What Arguments Motivate Citizens to Demand Nuclear Disarmament?
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Journal Article
- Research Policy
The Relationship Between Science and Technology
Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Ideal Qualities of a Successful Diplomat
Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
The Great Economic Rivalry: China vs the U.S.
Abstract
The study of existential risk — the risk of human extinction or the collapse of human civilization — has only recently emerged as an integrated field of research, and yet an overwhelming volume of relevant research has already been published. To provide an evidence base for policy and risk analysis, this research should be systematically reviewed. In a systematic review, one of many time-consuming tasks is to read the titles and abstracts of research publications, to see if they meet the inclusion criteria. We show how this task can be shared between multiple people (using crowdsourcing) and partially automated (using machine learning), as methods of handling an overwhelming volume of research. We used these methods to create The Existential Risk Research Assessment (TERRA), which is a living bibliography of relevant publications that gets updated each month (www.x-risk.net). We present the results from the first ten months of TERRA, in which 10,001 abstracts were screened by 51 participants. Several challenges need to be met before these methods can be used in systematic reviews. However, we suggest that collaborative and cumulative methods such as these will need to be used in systematic reviews as the volume of research increases.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via Futures.Shackelford, Gorm E, Luke Kemp, Catherine Rhodes, Lalitha Sundaram, Seán S. ÓhÉigeartaigh, Simon Beard, Haydn Belfield, Julius Weitzdörfer, Shahar Avin, Dag Sørebø, Elliot M. Jones, John B. Hume, David Price, David Pyle, Daniel Hurt, Theodore Stone, Harry Watkins, Lydia Collas, Bryony C. Cade, Thomas Frederick Johnson, Zachary Freitas-Groff, David Denkenberger, Michael Levot and William J. Sutherland. "Accumulating Evidence Using Crowdsourcing and Machine Learning: A Living Bibliography about Existential Risk and Global Catastrophic Risk." Futures, vol. 116. (February 2020).
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Journal Article - Nonproliferation Review
Gas, Norms, and Statistics: The Jury is Still Out
Book Chapter - Springer
Law and Policy Responses to Disaster-Induced Financial Distress
Journal Article - Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
What Arguments Motivate Citizens to Demand Nuclear Disarmament?
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Journal Article - Research Policy
The Relationship Between Science and Technology
Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Ideal Qualities of a Successful Diplomat
Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
The Great Economic Rivalry: China vs the U.S.