Related papers: A Cardinal Comparison of Experts
We initiate the study of incentive-compatible forecasting competitions in which multiple forecasters make predictions about one or more events and compete for a single prize. We have two objectives: (1) to incentivize forecasters to report…
Randomness in scientific estimation is generally assumed to arise from unmeasured or uncontrolled factors. However, when combining subjective probability estimates, heterogeneity stemming from people's cognitive or information diversity is…
Incorporation of expert information in inference or decision settings is often important, especially in cases where data are unavailable, costly or unreliable. One approach is to elicit prior quantiles from an expert and then to fit these…
Incomplete pairwise comparison matrices offer a natural way of expressing preferences in decision making processes. Although ordinal information is crucial, there is a bias in the literature: cardinal models dominate. Ordinal models usually…
We study a cheap-talk game where two experts first choose what information to acquire and then offer advice to a decision-maker whose actions affect the welfare of all. The experts cannot commit to reporting strategies. Yet, we show that…
Predictive models are often introduced to decision-making tasks under the rationale that they improve performance over an existing decision-making policy. However, it is challenging to compare predictive performance against an existing…
Pairwise comparisons are a well-known method for the representation of the subjective preferences of a decision maker. Evaluating their inconsistency has been a widely studied and discussed topic and several indices have been proposed in…
A group of experts, for instance climate scientists, is to choose among two policies $f$ and $g$. Consider the following decision rule. If all experts agree that the expected utility of $f$ is higher than the expected utility of $g$, the…
Calibration is a classical notion from the forecasting literature which aims to address the question: how should predicted probabilities be interpreted? In a world where we only get to observe (discrete) outcomes, how should we evaluate a…
Randomness in scientific estimation is generally assumed to arise from unmeasured or uncontrolled factors. However, when combining subjective probability estimates, heterogeneity stemming from people's cognitive or information diversity is…
Human explanations are often contrastive, meaning that they do not answer the indeterminate "Why?" question, but instead "Why P, rather than Q?". Automatically generating contrastive explanations is challenging because the contrastive event…
Consider two forecasters, each making a single prediction for a sequence of events over time. We ask a relatively basic question: how might we compare these forecasters, either online or post-hoc, while avoiding unverifiable assumptions on…
Questions on class cardinality comparisons are quite tricky to answer and come with its own challenges. They require some kind of reasoning since web documents and knowledge bases, indispensable sources of information, rarely store direct…
The plausibility of uncommon events and miracles based on testimony of such an event has been much discussed. When analyzing the probabilities involved, it has mostly been assumed that the common events can be taken as data in the…
We consider decision problems under uncertainty where the options available to a decision maker and the resulting outcome are related through a causal mechanism which is unknown to the decision maker. We ask how a decision maker can learn…
We study the merging and the testing of opinions in the context of a prediction model. In the absence of incentive problems, opinions can be tested and rejected, regardless of whether or not data produces consensus among Bayesian agents. In…
In this study, we introduce a new approach to statistical decision theory. Without using a loss function, we select good decision rules to choice between two hypotheses. We call them "experts". They are globally unbiased but also…
If two experts disagree on a test, we may conclude both cannot be 100 per cent correct. But if they completely agree, no possible evaluation can be excluded. This asymmetry in the utility of agreements versus disagreements is explored here…
We study expert advice with career concerns and continuous private signals. The principal always implements the safe option, and implements the risky option with a probability increasing in the expert's reputation; outcomes, when realized,…
We study a multiagent learning problem where agents can either learn via repeated interactions, or can follow the advice of a mediator who suggests possible actions to take. We present an algorithmthat each agent can use so that, with high…