IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/oropre/v56y2008i5p1146-1157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scoring Rules, Generalized Entropy, and Utility Maximization

Author

Listed:
  • Victor Richmond R. Jose

    (The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708)

  • Robert F. Nau

    (The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708)

  • Robert L. Winkler

    (The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708)

Abstract

Information measures arise in many disciplines, including forecasting (where scoring rules are used to provide incentives for probability estimation), signal processing (where information gain is measured in physical units of relative entropy), decision analysis (where new information can lead to improved decisions), and finance (where investors optimize portfolios based on their private information and risk preferences). In this paper, we generalize the two most commonly used parametric families of scoring rules and demonstrate their relation to well-known generalized entropies and utility functions, shedding new light on the characteristics of alternative scoring rules as well as duality relationships between utility maximization and entropy minimization. In particular, we show that weighted forms of the pseudospherical and power scoring rules correspond exactly to measures of relative entropy (divergence) with convenient properties, and they also correspond exactly to the solutions of expected utility maximization problems in which a risk-averse decision maker whose utility function belongs to the linear-risk-tolerance family interacts with a risk-neutral betting opponent or a complete market for contingent claims in either a one-period or a two-period setting. When the market is incomplete, the corresponding problems of maximizing linear-risk-tolerance utility with the risk-tolerance coefficient (beta) are the duals of the problems of minimizing the pseudospherical or power divergence of order (beta) between the decision maker's subjective probability distribution and the set of risk-neutral distributions that support asset prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Victor Richmond R. Jose & Robert F. Nau & Robert L. Winkler, 2008. "Scoring Rules, Generalized Entropy, and Utility Maximization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 1146-1157, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:56:y:2008:i:5:p:1146-1157
    DOI: 10.1287/opre.1070.0498
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.1070.0498
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/opre.1070.0498?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Friedman, 1983. "Effective Scoring Rules for Probabilistic Forecasts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 447-454, April.
    2. Freddy Delbaen & Peter Grandits & Thorsten Rheinländer & Dominick Samperi & Martin Schweizer & Christophe Stricker, 2002. "Exponential Hedging and Entropic Penalties," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), pages 99-123, April.
    3. R. Winkler & Javier Muñoz & José Cervera & José Bernardo & Gail Blattenberger & Joseph Kadane & Dennis Lindley & Allan Murphy & Robert Oliver & David Ríos-Insua, 1996. "Scoring rules and the evaluation of probabilities," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 5(1), pages 1-60, June.
    4. Gneiting, Tilmann & Raftery, Adrian E., 2007. "Strictly Proper Scoring Rules, Prediction, and Estimation," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 102, pages 359-378, March.
    5. J. Eric Bickel, 2007. "Some Comparisons among Quadratic, Spherical, and Logarithmic Scoring Rules," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 49-65, June.
    6. Robert F. Nau, 1985. "Should Scoring Rules be "Effective"?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(5), pages 527-535, May.
    7. Robert L. Winkler, 1994. "Evaluating Probabilities: Asymmetric Scoring Rules," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(11), pages 1395-1405, November.
    8. Thomas Goll & Ludger Rüschendorf, 2001. "Minimax and minimal distance martingale measures and their relationship to portfolio optimization," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 557-581.
    9. Reinhard Selten, 1998. "Axiomatic Characterization of the Quadratic Scoring Rule," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 43-61, June.
    10. Marco Frittelli, 2000. "The Minimal Entropy Martingale Measure and the Valuation Problem in Incomplete Markets," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 39-52, January.
    11. A. Dawid, 2007. "The geometry of proper scoring rules," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 59(1), pages 77-93, March.
    12. Richard Rouge & Nicole El Karoui, 2000. "Pricing Via Utility Maximization and Entropy," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(2), pages 259-276, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David J. Johnstone & Victor Richmond R. Jose & Robert L. Winkler, 2011. "Tailored Scoring Rules for Probabilities," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 256-268, December.
    2. Karl Schlag & James Tremewan & Joël Weele, 2015. "A penny for your thoughts: a survey of methods for eliciting beliefs," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(3), pages 457-490, September.
    3. Fang, Fang & Stinchcombe, Maxwell B. & Whinston, Andrew B., 2010. "Proper scoring rules with arbitrary value functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1200-1210, November.
    4. Owari, Keita & 尾張, 圭太, 2008. "Robust Exponential Hedging and Indifference Valuation," Discussion Papers 2008-09, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University.
    5. Nolan Miller & Paul Resnick & Richard Zeckhauser, 2005. "Eliciting Informative Feedback: The Peer-Prediction Method," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(9), pages 1359-1373, September.
    6. J. Eric Bickel, 2007. "Some Comparisons among Quadratic, Spherical, and Logarithmic Scoring Rules," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 49-65, June.
    7. Edgar C. Merkle & Mark Steyvers, 2013. "Choosing a Strictly Proper Scoring Rule," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 292-304, December.
    8. Karl Schlag & James Tremewan & Joël Weele, 2015. "A penny for your thoughts: a survey of methods for eliciting beliefs," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(3), pages 457-490, September.
    9. Robert L. Winkler & Yael Grushka-Cockayne & Kenneth C. Lichtendahl Jr. & Victor Richmond R. Jose, 2019. "Probability Forecasts and Their Combination: A Research Perspective," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 239-260, December.
    10. Lambert, Nicolas S. & Langford, John & Wortman Vaughan, Jennifer & Chen, Yiling & Reeves, Daniel M. & Shoham, Yoav & Pennock, David M., 2015. "An axiomatic characterization of wagering mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 389-416.
    11. Zachary J. Smith & J. Eric Bickel, 2020. "Additive Scoring Rules for Discrete Sample Spaces," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 115-133, June.
    12. Thorsten Rheinländer & Jenny Sexton, 2011. "Hedging Derivatives," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 8062, December.
    13. Ivan Peñaloza & Pablo Padilla, 2022. "A Pricing Method in a Constrained Market with Differential Informational Frameworks," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 60(3), pages 1055-1100, October.
    14. Victor Jose, 2009. "A Characterization for the Spherical Scoring Rule," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 263-281, March.
    15. Michail Anthropelos & Nikolaos E. Frangos & Stylianos Z. Xanthopoulos & Athanasios N. Yannacopoulos, 2008. "On contingent claims pricing in incomplete markets: A risk sharing approach," Papers 0809.4781, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2012.
    16. Wheatcroft Edward, 2021. "Evaluating probabilistic forecasts of football matches: the case against the ranked probability score," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 273-287, December.
    17. Michael Ludkovski & Qunying Shen, 2012. "European Option Pricing with Liquidity Shocks," Papers 1205.1007, arXiv.org.
    18. Tsukasa Fujiwara, 2004. "From the Minimal Entropy Martingale Measures to the Optimal Strategies for the Exponential Utility Maximization: the Case of Geometric Lévy Processes," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 11(4), pages 367-391, December.
    19. Friedrich Hubalek & Carlo Sgarra, 2006. "Esscher transforms and the minimal entropy martingale measure for exponential Levy models," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 125-145.
    20. repec:dau:papers:123456789/5374 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Markus Hess, 2019. "Optimal Equivalent Probability Measures under Enlarged Filtrations," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 813-839, December.

    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:inm:oropre:v:56:y:2008:i:5:p:1146-1157. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.