The Experts below are selected from a list of 222 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Simon Grant - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Subjective Probability without monotonicity or how machina s mom may also be probabilistically sophisticated
Econometrica, 1995Co-Authors: Simon GrantAbstract:If an agent's preferences over Subjectively uncertain acts are consistent with him having a Subjective Probability distribution over the states of nature, then those preferences can induce consistent preferences over 'objectively' risky lotteries. Such 'probabilistically sophisticated' behavior allows us to treat decision making under uncertainty as though it is under risk. This paper first characterizes exactly what probabilistic sophistication entails for an agent's beliefs about the likelihood of states of nature. Secondly, it presents characterizations of probabilistically sophisticated individuals whose induced lottery preferences obey neither the independence axiom nor a monotonicity property that is shown to share some of the nature of independence. Copyright 1995 by The Econometric Society.
Peter Juslin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Subjective Probability intervals how to reduce overconfidence by interval evaluation
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 2004Co-Authors: Anders Winman, Patrik Hansson, Peter JuslinAbstract:Format dependence implies that assessment of the same Subjective Probability distribution produces different conclusions about over- or underconfidence depending on the assessment format. In 2 expe ...
-
Computational models of Subjective Probability calibration
1999Co-Authors: Peter Juslin, Henrik OlssonAbstract:The chapter reviews the research performed in Uppsala in recent years that involves computational modeling of Subjective Probability calibration. The chapter covers the Brunswik-inspired research with the ecological models that stresses the representative
Christine Louise Berner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a comparison between a Probability bounds analysis and a Subjective Probability approach to express epistemic uncertainties in a risk assessment context a simple illustrative example
Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2018Co-Authors: Roger Flage, Terje Aven, Christine Louise BernerAbstract:A common approach to reliability and risk assessments is based on using Probability models to reflect aleatory uncertainties (i.e. variation in large populations of similar units) and using Subjective probabilities to describe epistemic uncertainties about the unknown parameters of the Probability models. The use of Subjective probabilities for this purpose has, however, been subject to strong criticism: it is argued that the approach provides too precise results when relating these to the information available. The assignments are based on a number of assumptions and proper justification for many of these seems to be lacking. Several alternative approaches have been suggested to meet this critique, including Probability bounds analysis (PBA). The purpose of this paper is to compare a PBA with a Subjective Probability analysis, based on different types of information, covering varying levels and quality of hard data and expert judgments. A simple production assurance example is used to illustrate the differences. The comparison highlights the dependence on assumptions with different levels of justification. The analysis performed also constitutes an illustration of a two-step approach, where a Subjective Probability approach is followed and accompanied by a PBA approach and where the result of both assessments are presented to the decision-maker.
William J Roberds - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
methods for developing defensible Subjective Probability assessments
Transportation Research Record, 1990Co-Authors: William J RoberdsAbstract:Typically, some degree of uncertainty exists in the value of geotechnical parameters at any site (e.g., owing to insufficient data, natural spatial variability, or possible changes with time). Often this uncetainty must be quantified (e.g., in terms of Probability distributions that express the relative likelihood of any value). Because of inevitable data base deficiencies, those Probability distributions must be based to some degree on Subjective assessments, reflecting personal opinions and judgment, consistent with all available information (site-specific and generic), and recognizing the entire range of possible values. Subjectively derived Probability distributions can represent the opinions of individuals or of groups. There are problems associated with either, which, if uncorrected, render the results suspect and difficult to defend. Various techniques have been developed to conduct Subjective Probability assessments with varying effort and success in mitigating such problems. Thus, the appropriate technique is that which provides the desired level of defensibility at least cost.
Roger Flage - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a comparison between a Probability bounds analysis and a Subjective Probability approach to express epistemic uncertainties in a risk assessment context a simple illustrative example
Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2018Co-Authors: Roger Flage, Terje Aven, Christine Louise BernerAbstract:A common approach to reliability and risk assessments is based on using Probability models to reflect aleatory uncertainties (i.e. variation in large populations of similar units) and using Subjective probabilities to describe epistemic uncertainties about the unknown parameters of the Probability models. The use of Subjective probabilities for this purpose has, however, been subject to strong criticism: it is argued that the approach provides too precise results when relating these to the information available. The assignments are based on a number of assumptions and proper justification for many of these seems to be lacking. Several alternative approaches have been suggested to meet this critique, including Probability bounds analysis (PBA). The purpose of this paper is to compare a PBA with a Subjective Probability analysis, based on different types of information, covering varying levels and quality of hard data and expert judgments. A simple production assurance example is used to illustrate the differences. The comparison highlights the dependence on assumptions with different levels of justification. The analysis performed also constitutes an illustration of a two-step approach, where a Subjective Probability approach is followed and accompanied by a PBA approach and where the result of both assessments are presented to the decision-maker.
