David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In practice, scoring rules elicit good probability estimates from individuals, while betting markets elicit good consensus estimates from groups. Market scoring rules combine these features, eliciting estimates from individuals or groups, with groups costing no more than individuals. Regarding a bet on one event given another event, only logarithmic versions preserve the probability of the given event. Logarithmic versions also preserve the conditional probabilities of other events, and so preserve conditional independence relations. Given logarithmic rules that elicit relative probabilities of base event pairs, it costs no more to elicit estimates on all combinations of these base events
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Jiaying Zhao, Anuj Shah & Daniel Osherson (2009). On the Provenance of Judgments of Conditional Probability. Cognition 113 (1):26-36.
Yiling Chen, Rahul Sami & Daniel M. Reeves, Gaming Prediction Markets: Equilibrium Strategies with a Market Maker.
Jake Chandler (2013). Acceptance, Aggregation and Scoring Rules. Erkenntnis 78 (1):201 - 217.
Joel Predd, Robert Seiringer, Elliott Lieb, Daniel Osherson, H. Vincent Poor & Sanjeev Kulkarni (2009). Probabilistic Coherence and Proper Scoring Rules. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 55 (10):4786-4792.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #40,522 of 1,099,914 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #304,017 of 1,099,914 )
How can I increase my downloads?