3 ms·
In "Superforecasting", it's a bit clearer. What they end up doing is asking you to predict an EVENT by a SPECIFIC TIME. In other words, what is the probability
by cl42 6y ago
In "Superforecasting", it's a bit clearer. What they end up doing is asking you to predict an EVENT by a SPECIFIC TIME. In other words, what is the probability that "x" will happen by "DATE Y".
In this case, by the time DATE Y takes place, you have a clearly verifiable binary outcome, which you can use to judge whether the forecasters were correct or not.
There is some art to this -- the "event" in question needs to be very well-defined... I think the example they're using is a bit odd and they have much better examples in their book. The example of a counterfactual event (i.e., 'if X happens then estimate the likelihood of Y happening by DATE Z') adds a great deal of confusion here because you're predicting conditional probabilities. Still possible to verify but to your point, much more difficult.
At this point, you're asking forecasters to build a probabilistic graph and estimate causality, which is becoming more of a science (e.g., Judea Pearle's work) but still lots to do in that space. Anyway, I'm digressing.
- vosper 6y agoThanks for the explanation, this helped me understand the idea a bit better.
- jacques_chester 6y agoAdding slightly to it: they use Brier scores to say how "good" someone is at prediction. Because these predictions require a probability of confidence, you can punish those who were confidently wrong or reward those who were confidently right. So if I predict "aliens will land on or before December 1st" with 100% and no aliens appear, then my Brier score is 1 (the worst). If I say 0% confidence, then my score is 0 (the best). There are dozens and dozens of ways of scoring prediction ability, as it happens: https://www.cawcr.gov.au/projects/verification/verif_web_page.html https://www.cawcr.gov.au/projects/verification/verif_web_pag...