‘Combining Probability Distributions from Experts in Risk Analysis’

By S. Kaplan. Risk Analysis, 2000

688 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0486d3a062802b384a649b67d34ee15c39fe8d06

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

Citations in the corpus

Expert judgement elicitation for risk assessments of critical infrastructures (2004, background): “Both mathematical approaches with some modelling and behavioural approaches seem to provide results that are inferior to simple mathematical combination rules (Clemen and Winkler, 1999).”
Evaluating, Comparing and Combining Density Forecasts Using the KLIC with an Application to the Bank of England and NIESR 'Fan' Charts of Inflation (2005, neutral): “Clements (2004a) evaluates Bank of England density forecasts of year-ahead inflation, using a range of statistical tests, over the shorter sample period, 1997q3-2002q1. Hall & Mitchell (2004a) also provide a more detailed evaluation of Bank of England and NIESR density forecast, like Clements, consi”
Structured elicitation of expert judgments for threatened species assessment: a case study on a continental scale using email (2012, background): “However, combining disparate opinions raises several methodological difficulties, principally because there is no objective basis for combining multiple expert opinions (Keith 1996; Clemen & Winkler 1999).”
Does climate policy need probabilities (2003, background): “Representing epistemic uncertainty in a probabilistic fashion has been relatively accepted, either through probability distributions based on scientific evidence or expert judgements, although the aggregation of expert opinions is still controversial (see Clemen and Winkler, 1999 for a review).”
Sentiment analysis of blogs by combining lexical knowledge with text classification (2009, background): “The combination of such expert probability distributions has been an area of much study in the .eld of Risk Analysis [3].”
Combining Predictive Distributions (2011, methodology): “While other methods for combining predictive distributions are available (Genest and Zidek 1986; Clemen and Winkler 1999; 2007), the linear pool is typically the method of choice, with the pioneering work of Winkler (1968) and Zarnowitz (1969), and recent papers by Mitchell and Hall (2005), Wallis…”
Crowd-sourced Text Analysis: Reproducible and Agile Production of Political Data (2016, methodology): “Mathematical and behavioral studies on aggregations of individual judgments imply that simpler methods often perform as well as more complicated ones, and often more robustly (e.g., Ariely et al. 2000; Clemen and Winkler 1999).”
Trust and Information Sharing in Supply Chains (2012, background): “As suggested by Stone (1961) and Clemen and Winkler (1999), we assume that the retailer combines the two order quantities using a simple weighted average:”
Constructing Probability Boxes and Dempster-Shafer Structures (2003, methodology): “Bayesian methods are regarded by many analysts as the best (or even the only coherent) way to represent and manipulate uncertainty in the context of decision making (French 1985; Genest and Zidek 1986; cf. Cooke 1991; Clemen and Winkler 1999).”
Technology futures analysis: Toward integration of the field and new methods (2004, neutral): “Risk analysis Desc/Stat H/S N/Ex [35,36] Roadmapping [product-technology roadmapping] Desc H/S N/Ex [37–41]”
Strength in Numbers: Robust Tamper Detection in Crowd Computations (2015, background): “Now, these distributions are aggregated into a single reference distribution R j ( UC ) us-ing a linear opinion pool [17] model.”
Epistemic democracy with correlated voters (2017, background): “(5)Cervone and Zwicker (2009) contains a similar example, but their focus is on convex partitions rather than scoring rules.”
Does climate adaptation policy need probabilities? (2004, background): “Representing epistemic uncertainty in a probabilistic fashion has been relatively widely accepted, either through probability distributions based on scientific evidence or expert judgements, although the aggregation of expert opinions is still controversial (see Clemen and Winkler, 1999, for a rev”