Quantity vs Quality: Investigating the Trade-Off between Sample Size and
  Label Reliability
  In this paper, we study learning in probabilistic domains where the learner
may receive incorrect labels but can improve the reliability of labels by
repeatedly sampling them. In such a setting, one faces the problem of whether
the fixed budget for obtaining training examples should rather be used for
obtaining all different examples or for improving the label quality of a
smaller number of examples by re-sampling their labels. We motivate this
problem in an application to compare the strength of poker hands where the
training signal depends on the hidden community cards, and then study it in
depth in an artificial setting where we insert controlled noise levels into the
MNIST database. Our results show that with increasing levels of noise,
resampling previous examples becomes increasingly more important than obtaining
new examples, as classifier performance deteriorates when the number of
incorrect labels is too high. In addition, we propose two different validation
strategies; switching from lower to higher validations over the course of
training and using chi-square statistics to approximate the confidence in
obtained labels.
