Morendil comments on [LINK] Get paid to train your rationality - Less Wrong

27 Post author: XFrequentist 03 August 2011 03:01PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (55)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Morendil 02 November 2011 06:29:51PM *  2 points [-]

The Good Judgment project has started publishing a leaderboard. FWIW, as of this writing I am in pole position with a "Brier score" of 0.18, with numbers 2 and 3 at 0.2 and 0.23 respectively. (I'm not sure whether other participants are also from LW.)

(ETA: dethroned! I'm #2 now, #1 has a score of .16.)

Team scores seem a bit below the best individual scores: 0.32, 0.33 and 0.36 for the best three teams.

From the emails I've been getting from the organizers, they have trouble sustaining participation from all who signed up; poor participation is leading to poor forecasting scores.

Comment author: anonomouse 08 November 2011 04:22:45PM 1 point [-]

FYI the leaderboard rankings are fake, or at least generated strategically to provide users with specific information. I am near the top of my own leaderboard, while my friend sees his own name but not mine. Also, my Brier is listed at 0.19, strikingly close to yours. I wonder if they are generated with some apparent distribution.

My take is that the leader stats are some kind of specific experimental treatment they're toying with.

Comment author: Morendil 08 November 2011 06:27:44PM 1 point [-]

This is almost more interesting than the study itself. :)

Are your friend and you able to see each other's comments on predictions?

Comment author: JoshuaZ 02 November 2011 06:32:13PM 1 point [-]

poor participation is leading to poor forecasting scores.

Hmm, correlation v. causation maybe? It is possible that some people were doing poorly and so started participating less?

Comment author: Morendil 02 November 2011 06:54:45PM 1 point [-]

Yes, it's possible too. I used "causing" referring to a direct link: some predictions are of the form "event X will happen before date D", and you lose points if you fail to revise your estimates as D draws nearer.

Apparently many people weren't aware of this aspect - they took a "fire and forget" approach to prediction. (That is in itself an interesting lesson.) That was before the leaderboard was set up.