IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/compst/v30y2015i1p231-249.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Model evaluation, discrepancy function estimation, and social choice theory

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Neath
  • Joseph Cavanaugh
  • Adam Weyhaupt

Abstract

A discrepancy function provides for an evaluation of a candidate model by quantifying the disparity between the candidate model and the true model that generated the observed data. The favored model from a candidate class is the one judged to have minimum discrepancy with the true model. The observed data can be regarded as a manifestation of the underlying true model. However, since the data provides only partial information as to the nature of the true model, the selection of a model is a decision that is made in the presence of uncertainty. To characterize this uncertainty, we consider employing resampling to generate multiple manifestations of the true model. Each of the candidate models can then be judged against each of the simulated versions of the true model, resulting in multiple panels of discrepancies. Model evaluation is subsequently achieved by providing an overall judgment on each candidate model. This overall assessment is based on combining the information in the individual discrepancy panels. As social choice theory, or voting theory, addresses the problem of turning individual preferences into a group preference, we see that social choice theory can be used in developing a novel approach to model evaluation. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Neath & Joseph Cavanaugh & Adam Weyhaupt, 2015. "Model evaluation, discrepancy function estimation, and social choice theory," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 231-249, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:compst:v:30:y:2015:i:1:p:231-249
    DOI: 10.1007/s00180-014-0532-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00180-014-0532-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00180-014-0532-z?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saari,Donald G., 2001. "Decisions and Elections," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521808163, November.
    2. Saari,Donald G., 2001. "Decisions and Elections," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521004046, November.
    3. Hirotugu Akaike, 1969. "Fitting autoregressive models for prediction," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 21(1), pages 243-247, December.
    4. Makio Ishiguro & Yosiyuki Sakamoto & Genshiro Kitagawa, 1997. "Bootstrapping Log Likelihood and EIC, an Extension of AIC," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 49(3), pages 411-434, September.
    5. Claeskens,Gerda & Hjort,Nils Lid, 2008. "Model Selection and Model Averaging," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521852258, November.
    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. Michel Balinski & Rida Laraki, 2022. "Majority Judgment vs. Approval Voting," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 70(3), pages 1296-1316, May.
    2. Donald Saari, 2006. "Which is better: the Condorcet or Borda winner?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(1), pages 107-129, January.
    3. Herrade Igersheim, 2006. "Libéralisme de la liberté versus libéralisme du bonheur. Le cas du paradoxe libéral-parétien," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 57(3), pages 389-398.
    4. William Gehrlein & Florenz Plassmann, 2014. "A comparison of theoretical and empirical evaluations of the Borda Compromise," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(3), pages 747-772, October.
    5. Wiktor Adamowicz & Michel Hanemann & Joffre Swait & Reed Johnson & David Layton & Michel Regenwetter & Torsten Reimer & Robert Sorkin, 2005. "Decision Strategy and Structure in Households: A “Groups” Perspective," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 387-399, December.
    6. Perote-Pena, Juan & Piggins, Ashley, 2005. "Pareto efficiency with spatial rights," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 265-283, April.
    7. Aki Lehtinen, 2007. "The Borda rule is also intended for dishonest men," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 73-90, October.
    8. Maurice Salles, 2006. "La théorie du choix social : de l'importance des mathématiques," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 200617, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
    9. Herrade Igersheim, 2005. "Extending Xu's results to Arrow''s Impossibility Theorem," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(13), pages 1-6.
    10. Nicolas Gabriel Andjiga & Issofa Moyouwou & Monge Kleber Kamdem Ouambo, 2017. "Avoiding Majority Dissatisfaction on a Series of Majority Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 453-471, May.
    11. Roy, Sunanda & Wu, Kuan Chuen & Chandra, Abhijit, 2014. "Uncovering the "Will of the People": Heterogeneity and Polarization within electorates," Staff General Research Papers Archive 37330, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Shmuel Nitzan, 2010. "Demystifying the ‘metric approach to social compromise with the unanimity criterion’," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(1), pages 25-28, June.
    13. Conal Duddy & Ashley Piggins & William Zwicker, 2016. "Aggregation of binary evaluations: a Borda-like approach," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(2), pages 301-333, February.
    14. Abhijit Chandra & Sunanda Roy, 2013. "On removing Condorcet effects from pairwise election tallies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(4), pages 1143-1158, April.
    15. Michael Vogt & Oliver Linton, 2014. "Nonparametric estimation of a periodic sequence in the presence of a smooth trend," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 101(1), pages 121-140.
    16. Leo Katz, 2010. "A Theory of Loopholes," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-31, January.
    17. Shin Sato, 2012. "On strategy-proof social choice under categorization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 455-471, March.
    18. Antoinette Baujard, 2006. "L'estimation des préférences individuelles en vue de la décision publique. Problèmes, paradoxes, enjeux," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 175(4), pages 51-63.
    19. Colignatus, Thomas, 2013. "The performance of four possible rules for selecting the Prime Minister after the Dutch Parliamentary elections of September 2012," MPRA Paper 44158, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 02 Feb 2013.
    20. Eyal Baharad & Shmuel Nitzan, 2016. "Is majority consistency possible?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(2), pages 287-299, February.

    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:spr:compst:v:30:y:2015:i:1:p:231-249. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.