Incentive-Compatible Forecasting Competitions
Authors:
Jens Witkowski,
Rupert Freeman,
Jennifer Wortman Vaughan,
David M. Pennock,
Andreas Krause
Abstract:
We initiate the study of incentive-compatible forecasting competitions in which multiple forecasters make predictions about one or more events and compete for a single prize. We have two objectives: (1) to incentivize forecasters to report truthfully and (2) to award the prize to the most accurate forecaster. Proper scoring rules incentivize truthful reporting if all forecasters are paid according…
▽ More
We initiate the study of incentive-compatible forecasting competitions in which multiple forecasters make predictions about one or more events and compete for a single prize. We have two objectives: (1) to incentivize forecasters to report truthfully and (2) to award the prize to the most accurate forecaster. Proper scoring rules incentivize truthful reporting if all forecasters are paid according to their scores. However, incentives become distorted if only the best-scoring forecaster wins a prize, since forecasters can often increase their probability of having the highest score by reporting more extreme beliefs. In this paper, we introduce two novel forecasting competition mechanisms. Our first mechanism is incentive compatible and guaranteed to select the most accurate forecaster with probability higher than any other forecaster. Moreover, we show that in the standard single-event, two-forecaster setting and under mild technical conditions, no other incentive-compatible mechanism selects the most accurate forecaster with higher probability. Our second mechanism is incentive compatible when forecasters' beliefs are such that information about one event does not lead to belief updates on other events, and it selects the best forecaster with probability approaching 1 as the number of events grows. Our notion of incentive compatibility is more general than previous definitions of dominant strategy incentive compatibility in that it allows for reports to be correlated with the event outcomes. Moreover, our mechanisms are easy to implement and can be generalized to the related problems of outputting a ranking over forecasters and hiring a forecaster with high accuracy on future events.
△ Less
Submitted 7 September, 2021; v1 submitted 5 January, 2021;
originally announced January 2021.
Truthful Feedback for Sanctioning Reputation Mechanisms
Authors:
Jens Witkowski
Abstract:
For product rating environments, similar to that of Amazon Reviews, it has been shown that the truthful elicitation of feedback is possible through mechanisms which pay buyer reports contingent on the reports of other buyers. We study whether similar mechanisms can be designed for reputation mechanisms at online auction sites where the buyers' experiences are partially determined by a strategic se…
▽ More
For product rating environments, similar to that of Amazon Reviews, it has been shown that the truthful elicitation of feedback is possible through mechanisms which pay buyer reports contingent on the reports of other buyers. We study whether similar mechanisms can be designed for reputation mechanisms at online auction sites where the buyers' experiences are partially determined by a strategic seller. We show that this is impossible for the basic setting. However, introducing a small prior belief that the seller is a cooperative commitment player leads to a payment scheme with a truthful perfect Bayesian equilibrium.
△ Less
Submitted 15 March, 2012;
originally announced March 2012.
