In Favor of Logarithmic Scoring.
Shuford, Albert, and Massengill proved, a half century ago, that the logarithmic scoring rule is the only proper measure of inaccuracy determined by a differentiable function of probability assigned the actual cell of a scored partition. In spite of this, the log rule has gained less traction in app...
| Publicado en: | Philosophy of Science Vol. 86; no. 2; pp. 286 - 304 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
Apr2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=135472964&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 135472964 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00318248 PSC jtl: Philosophy of Science issn: 00318248 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Apr2019 vid: 86 iid: 2 pid: 15979 pub: Cambridge University Press artinfo: ui: 135472964 10.1086/702028 ppf: 286 ppct: 18 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 1.3MB tig: atl: In Favor of Logarithmic Scoring. aug: au: McCutcheon, Randall G. su: Probability theory Logarithmic functions Mathematical analysis Numerical analysis Banach spaces sug: subj: Probability theory Logarithmic functions Mathematical analysis Numerical analysis Banach spaces ab: Shuford, Albert, and Massengill proved, a half century ago, that the logarithmic scoring rule is the only proper measure of inaccuracy determined by a differentiable function of probability assigned the actual cell of a scored partition. In spite of this, the log rule has gained less traction in applied disciplines and among formal epistemologists that one might expect. In this article we show that the differentiability criterion in the Shuford et al. result is unnecessary and use the resulting simplified characterization of the logarithmic rule to give novel arguments in favor of it. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Philosophy of Science holder: Cambridge University Press dt: @attributes: year: 2019 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|