Sensitivity to Distance and Baseline Distributions in Forecast Evaluation

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0955

References

  • Epstein E. S. A scoring system for probability forecasts of ranked categories. J. Appl. Meteorol. (1969) 8(6):985–987CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Gneiting T., Raftery A. Strictly proper scoring rules, prediction, and estimation. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (2007) 102(477):359–378CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Havrda J., Chavrát F. Quantification method of classification processes: The concept of structural α -entropy. Kybernetika (1967) 3:30–35Google Scholar
  • Jose V. R. R., Nau R. F., Winkler R. L. Scoring rules, generalized entropy, and utility maximization. Oper. Res. (2008) 56(5):1146–1157LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Matheson J., Winkler R. L. Scoring rules for continuous probability distributions. Management Sci. (1976) 22(10):1087–1096LinkGoogle Scholar
  • McCarthy J. Measures of the value of information. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (1956) 42:654–655CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Murphy A. H. The ranked probability score and the probability score: A comparison. Monthly Weather Rev. (1970) 98(12):917–924CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Murphy A. H. A note on the ranked probability score. J. Appl. Meteorol. (1971) 10(1):155–156CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Murphy A. H. Hedging and skill scores for probability forecasts. J. Appl. Meteorol. (1973) 12(1):215–223CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Nau R. F. Scoring rules that are sensitive to distance and dominance. (2007) . Working paper, Duke University, Durham, NCGoogle Scholar
  • Savage L. J. Elicitation of personal probabilities and expectations. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (1971) 66(336):783–801CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Schervish M. J. A general method for comparing probability assessors. Ann. Statist. (1989) 17(4):1856–1879CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Staël von Holstein C.-A. S. A family of strictly proper scoring rules which are sensitive to distance. J. Appl. Meteorol. (1970a) 9(3):360–364CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Staël von Holstein C.-A. S.Assessment and Evaluation of Subjective Probability Distributions (1970b) (The Economic Research Institute at the Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm) Google Scholar
  • Winkler R. L. Evaluating probabilities: Asymmetric scoring rules. Management Sci. (1994) 40(11):1395–1405LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Winkler R. L. Scoring rules and the evaluation of probabilities. Test (1996) 5(1):1–60CrossrefGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.