IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v1y2004i2p108-113.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Elicitation of Probabilities Using Competitive Scoring Rules

Author

Listed:
  • D. Marc Kilgour

    (Department of Mathematics, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3C5)

  • Yigal Gerchak

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv 69978, Israel)

Abstract

Several forecasters predict the probability of an event, and then make or receive payments contingent on their predictions and on whether the event actually occurs. The payment functions generalize the concept of scoring rule to a competitive setting. We allow for exogenously determined subsidies to each forecaster, and require that the scheme be anonymous, neutral, and truth-inducing. By centering each forecaster's payment at the average payment to all other forecasters, we construct competitive scoring rules that reward the better predictors. Applications include multiparty betting and fixed-budget surveys to determine subjects' truthful probability assessments. We discuss when forecasters would voluntarily participate in such a competition, and relate our results to the scoring rules proposed by De Finetti (1974) for eliciting probabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • D. Marc Kilgour & Yigal Gerchak, 2004. "Elicitation of Probabilities Using Competitive Scoring Rules," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(2), pages 108-113, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:1:y:2004:i:2:p:108-113
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.1030.0003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.1030.0003
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.1030.0003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Allan H. Murphy & Robert L. Winkler, 1977. "Reliability of Subjective Probability Forecasts of Precipitation and Temperature," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 26(1), pages 41-47, March.
    2. Robert L. Winkler, 1994. "Evaluating Probabilities: Asymmetric Scoring Rules," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(11), pages 1395-1405, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. James S. Dyer & James E. Smith, 2021. "Innovations in the Science and Practice of Decision Analysis: The Role of Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5364-5378, September.
    2. Victor Richmond R. Jose & Robert L. Winkler, 2009. "Evaluating Quantile Assessments," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 1287-1297, October.
    3. McKenzie, Craig R.M. & Liersch, Michael J. & Yaniv, Ilan, 2008. "Overconfidence in interval estimates: What does expertise buy you?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 179-191, November.
    4. Victor Jose, 2009. "A Characterization for the Spherical Scoring Rule," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 263-281, March.
    5. Sohail Abbas & Zulfiqar Ali Mayo, 2021. "Impact of temperature and rainfall on rice production in Punjab, Pakistan," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 1706-1728, February.
    6. Thomas Astebro & Frank Fossen & Cédric Gutierrez, 2024. "Entrepreneurs: Clueless, Biased, Poor Heuristics, or Bayesian Machines?," Working Papers hal-04759301, HAL.
    7. Alvaro Sandroni & Eran Shmaya, 2013. "Eliciting Beliefs by Paying in Chance," Discussion Papers 1565, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    8. Walter Krämer & André Güttler, 2008. "On comparing the accuracy of default predictions in the rating industry," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 343-356, March.
    9. James K. Hammitt & Alexander I. Shlyakhter, 1999. "The Expected Value of Information and the Probability of Surprise," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 135-152, February.
    10. Li, Dawei & Feng, Siqi & Song, Yuchen & Lai, Xinjun & Bekhor, Shlomo, 2023. "Asymmetric closed-form route choice models: Formulations and comparative applications," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    11. Dimitriadis, Timo & Gneiting, Tilmann & Jordan, Alexander I. & Vogel, Peter, 2024. "Evaluating probabilistic classifiers: The triptych," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 1101-1122.
    12. Eva Regnier, 2018. "Probability Forecasts Made at Multiple Lead Times," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 2407-2426, May.
    13. David Bessler & Robert Ruffley, 2004. "Prequential analysis of stock market returns," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(5), pages 399-412.
    14. Rakesh K. Sarin, 2013. "From the Editor ---Median Aggregation, Scoring Rules, Expert Forecasts, Choices with Binary Attributes, Portfolio with Dependent Projects, and Information Security," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 277-278, December.
    15. Dharmasena, Senarath & Bessler, David & Capps, Oral. Jr, 2016. "On the Evaluation of Probability Forecasts: An Application to Qualitative Choice Models," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235424, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:5:p:445-464 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Theo Offerman & Asa B. Palley, 2016. "Lossed in translation: an off-the-shelf method to recover probabilistic beliefs from loss-averse agents," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(1), pages 1-30, March.
    18. Saiwing Yeung, 2014. "Framing effect in evaluation of others' predictions," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(5), pages 445-464, September.
    19. M Revie & T Bedford & L Walls, 2010. "Evaluation of elicitation methods to quantify Bayes linear models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 224(4), pages 322-332, December.
    20. Fergus Bolger & Gene Rowe, 2015. "The Aggregation of Expert Judgment: Do Good Things Come to Those Who Weight?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 5-11, January.
    21. Stephen C. Hora, 2010. "An Analytic Method for Evaluating the Performance of Aggregation Rules for Probability Densities," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(5), pages 1440-1449, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:1:y:2004:i:2:p:108-113. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.