Binary Scoring Rules that Incentivize Precision

All proper scoring rules incentivize an expert to predict \emph{accurately} (report their true estimate), but not all proper scoring rules equally incentivize \emph{precision}. Rather than treating the expert's belief as exogenously given, we consider a model where a rational expert can endogen...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:arXiv.org 2021-05
Hauptverfasser: Neyman, Eric, Noarov, Georgy, Weinberg, S Matthew
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title arXiv.org
container_volume
creator Neyman, Eric
Noarov, Georgy
Weinberg, S Matthew
description All proper scoring rules incentivize an expert to predict \emph{accurately} (report their true estimate), but not all proper scoring rules equally incentivize \emph{precision}. Rather than treating the expert's belief as exogenously given, we consider a model where a rational expert can endogenously refine their belief by repeatedly paying a fixed cost, and is incentivized to do so by a proper scoring rule. Specifically, our expert aims to predict the probability that a biased coin flipped tomorrow will land heads, and can flip the coin any number of times today at a cost of \(c\) per flip. Our first main result defines an \emph{incentivization index} for proper scoring rules, and proves that this index measures the expected error of the expert's estimate (where the number of flips today is chosen adaptively to maximize the predictor's expected payoff). Our second main result finds the unique scoring rule which optimizes the incentivization index over all proper scoring rules. We also consider extensions to minimizing the \(\ell^{th}\) moment of error, and again provide an incentivization index and optimal proper scoring rule. In some cases, the resulting scoring rule is differentiable, but not infinitely differentiable. In these cases, we further prove that the optimum can be uniformly approximated by polynomial scoring rules. Finally, we compare common scoring rules via our measure, and include simulations confirming the relevance of our measure even in domains outside where it provably applies.
doi_str_mv 10.48550/arxiv.2002.10669
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_arxiv</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_arxiv_primary_2002_10669</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2364746982</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a522-cfee91ba692eaa7e1b35aa0aca081b859eea095f18b81ee8dadcb50cc382c6c03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotj1FLwzAUhYMgOOZ-gE8WfO6W3DRp8qhD3WCg6N7LbXarGTOdSTvUX2_dfDoP53D4PsauBJ8WRik-w_jlD1PgHKaCa23P2AikFLkpAC7YJKUtHzpdglJyxGZ3PmD8zl5dG314y176HaWse8cuWwZHofMH_0PZcyTnk2_DJTtvcJdo8p9jtn64X88X-erpcTm_XeWoAHLXEFlRo7ZAiCWJWipEjg65EbVRlgi5VY0wtRFEZoMbVyvunDTgtONyzK5Pt0ebah_9x0BZ_VlVR6thcXNa7GP72VPqqm3bxzAwVSB1URbaGpC_GJ5P9g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2364746982</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Binary Scoring Rules that Incentivize Precision</title><source>arXiv.org</source><source>Free E- Journals</source><creator>Neyman, Eric ; Noarov, Georgy ; Weinberg, S Matthew</creator><creatorcontrib>Neyman, Eric ; Noarov, Georgy ; Weinberg, S Matthew</creatorcontrib><description>All proper scoring rules incentivize an expert to predict \emph{accurately} (report their true estimate), but not all proper scoring rules equally incentivize \emph{precision}. Rather than treating the expert's belief as exogenously given, we consider a model where a rational expert can endogenously refine their belief by repeatedly paying a fixed cost, and is incentivized to do so by a proper scoring rule. Specifically, our expert aims to predict the probability that a biased coin flipped tomorrow will land heads, and can flip the coin any number of times today at a cost of \(c\) per flip. Our first main result defines an \emph{incentivization index} for proper scoring rules, and proves that this index measures the expected error of the expert's estimate (where the number of flips today is chosen adaptively to maximize the predictor's expected payoff). Our second main result finds the unique scoring rule which optimizes the incentivization index over all proper scoring rules. We also consider extensions to minimizing the \(\ell^{th}\) moment of error, and again provide an incentivization index and optimal proper scoring rule. In some cases, the resulting scoring rule is differentiable, but not infinitely differentiable. In these cases, we further prove that the optimum can be uniformly approximated by polynomial scoring rules. Finally, we compare common scoring rules via our measure, and include simulations confirming the relevance of our measure even in domains outside where it provably applies.</description><identifier>EISSN: 2331-8422</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2002.10669</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ithaca: Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</publisher><subject>Computer Science - Computer Science and Game Theory ; Computer simulation ; Error analysis ; Optimization ; Polynomials</subject><ispartof>arXiv.org, 2021-05</ispartof><rights>2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>228,230,780,784,885,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://doi.org/10.1145/3465456.3467639$$DView published paper (Access to full text may be restricted)$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2002.10669$$DView paper in arXiv$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Neyman, Eric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Noarov, Georgy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weinberg, S Matthew</creatorcontrib><title>Binary Scoring Rules that Incentivize Precision</title><title>arXiv.org</title><description>All proper scoring rules incentivize an expert to predict \emph{accurately} (report their true estimate), but not all proper scoring rules equally incentivize \emph{precision}. Rather than treating the expert's belief as exogenously given, we consider a model where a rational expert can endogenously refine their belief by repeatedly paying a fixed cost, and is incentivized to do so by a proper scoring rule. Specifically, our expert aims to predict the probability that a biased coin flipped tomorrow will land heads, and can flip the coin any number of times today at a cost of \(c\) per flip. Our first main result defines an \emph{incentivization index} for proper scoring rules, and proves that this index measures the expected error of the expert's estimate (where the number of flips today is chosen adaptively to maximize the predictor's expected payoff). Our second main result finds the unique scoring rule which optimizes the incentivization index over all proper scoring rules. We also consider extensions to minimizing the \(\ell^{th}\) moment of error, and again provide an incentivization index and optimal proper scoring rule. In some cases, the resulting scoring rule is differentiable, but not infinitely differentiable. In these cases, we further prove that the optimum can be uniformly approximated by polynomial scoring rules. Finally, we compare common scoring rules via our measure, and include simulations confirming the relevance of our measure even in domains outside where it provably applies.</description><subject>Computer Science - Computer Science and Game Theory</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Error analysis</subject><subject>Optimization</subject><subject>Polynomials</subject><issn>2331-8422</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GOX</sourceid><recordid>eNotj1FLwzAUhYMgOOZ-gE8WfO6W3DRp8qhD3WCg6N7LbXarGTOdSTvUX2_dfDoP53D4PsauBJ8WRik-w_jlD1PgHKaCa23P2AikFLkpAC7YJKUtHzpdglJyxGZ3PmD8zl5dG314y176HaWse8cuWwZHofMH_0PZcyTnk2_DJTtvcJdo8p9jtn64X88X-erpcTm_XeWoAHLXEFlRo7ZAiCWJWipEjg65EbVRlgi5VY0wtRFEZoMbVyvunDTgtONyzK5Pt0ebah_9x0BZ_VlVR6thcXNa7GP72VPqqm3bxzAwVSB1URbaGpC_GJ5P9g</recordid><startdate>20210529</startdate><enddate>20210529</enddate><creator>Neyman, Eric</creator><creator>Noarov, Georgy</creator><creator>Weinberg, S Matthew</creator><general>Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</general><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>AKY</scope><scope>GOX</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210529</creationdate><title>Binary Scoring Rules that Incentivize Precision</title><author>Neyman, Eric ; Noarov, Georgy ; Weinberg, S Matthew</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a522-cfee91ba692eaa7e1b35aa0aca081b859eea095f18b81ee8dadcb50cc382c6c03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Computer Science - Computer Science and Game Theory</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Error analysis</topic><topic>Optimization</topic><topic>Polynomials</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Neyman, Eric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Noarov, Georgy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weinberg, S Matthew</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>arXiv Computer Science</collection><collection>arXiv.org</collection><jtitle>arXiv.org</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Neyman, Eric</au><au>Noarov, Georgy</au><au>Weinberg, S Matthew</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Binary Scoring Rules that Incentivize Precision</atitle><jtitle>arXiv.org</jtitle><date>2021-05-29</date><risdate>2021</risdate><eissn>2331-8422</eissn><abstract>All proper scoring rules incentivize an expert to predict \emph{accurately} (report their true estimate), but not all proper scoring rules equally incentivize \emph{precision}. Rather than treating the expert's belief as exogenously given, we consider a model where a rational expert can endogenously refine their belief by repeatedly paying a fixed cost, and is incentivized to do so by a proper scoring rule. Specifically, our expert aims to predict the probability that a biased coin flipped tomorrow will land heads, and can flip the coin any number of times today at a cost of \(c\) per flip. Our first main result defines an \emph{incentivization index} for proper scoring rules, and proves that this index measures the expected error of the expert's estimate (where the number of flips today is chosen adaptively to maximize the predictor's expected payoff). Our second main result finds the unique scoring rule which optimizes the incentivization index over all proper scoring rules. We also consider extensions to minimizing the \(\ell^{th}\) moment of error, and again provide an incentivization index and optimal proper scoring rule. In some cases, the resulting scoring rule is differentiable, but not infinitely differentiable. In these cases, we further prove that the optimum can be uniformly approximated by polynomial scoring rules. Finally, we compare common scoring rules via our measure, and include simulations confirming the relevance of our measure even in domains outside where it provably applies.</abstract><cop>Ithaca</cop><pub>Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</pub><doi>10.48550/arxiv.2002.10669</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 2331-8422
ispartof arXiv.org, 2021-05
issn 2331-8422
language eng
recordid cdi_arxiv_primary_2002_10669
source arXiv.org; Free E- Journals
subjects Computer Science - Computer Science and Game Theory
Computer simulation
Error analysis
Optimization
Polynomials
title Binary Scoring Rules that Incentivize Precision
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T16%3A17%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_arxiv&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Binary%20Scoring%20Rules%20that%20Incentivize%20Precision&rft.jtitle=arXiv.org&rft.au=Neyman,%20Eric&rft.date=2021-05-29&rft.eissn=2331-8422&rft_id=info:doi/10.48550/arxiv.2002.10669&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_arxiv%3E2364746982%3C/proquest_arxiv%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2364746982&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true