IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/polals/v31y2023i4p651-661_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recalibration of Predicted Probabilities Using the “Logit Shift”: Why Does It Work, and When Can It Be Expected to Work Well?

Author

Listed:
  • Rosenman, Evan T. R.
  • McCartan, Cory
  • Olivella, Santiago

Abstract

The output of predictive models is routinely recalibrated by reconciling low-level predictions with known quantities defined at higher levels of aggregation. For example, models predicting vote probabilities at the individual level in U.S. elections can be adjusted so that their aggregation matches the observed vote totals in each county, thus producing better-calibrated predictions. In this research note, we provide theoretical grounding for one of the most commonly used recalibration strategies, known colloquially as the “logit shift.” Typically cast as a heuristic adjustment strategy (whereby a constant correction on the logit scale is found, such that aggregated predictions match target totals), we show that the logit shift offers a fast and accurate approximation to a principled, but computationally impractical adjustment strategy: computing the posterior prediction probabilities, conditional on the observed totals. After deriving analytical bounds on the quality of the approximation, we illustrate its accuracy using Monte Carlo simulations. We also discuss scenarios in which the logit shift is less effective at recalibrating predictions: when the target totals are defined only for highly heterogeneous populations, and when the original predictions correctly capture the mean of true individual probabilities, but fail to capture the shape of their distribution.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosenman, Evan T. R. & McCartan, Cory & Olivella, Santiago, 2023. "Recalibration of Predicted Probabilities Using the “Logit Shift”: Why Does It Work, and When Can It Be Expected to Work Well?," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 651-661, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:31:y:2023:i:4:p:651-661_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1047198722000316/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:polals:v:31:y:2023:i:4:p:651-661_11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.