Abstract
AbstractThere are many reasons we might want to take the opinions of various individuals and pool them to give the opinions of the group they constitute. If all the individuals in the group have probabilistic opinions about the same propositions, there is a host of pooling functions we might deploy, such as linear or geometric pooling. However, there are also cases where different members of the group assign probabilities to different sets of propositions, which might overlap a lot, a little, or not at all. There are far fewer proposals for how to proceed in these cases, and those there are have undesirable features. I begin by considering four proposals and arguing that they don’t work. Then I’ll describe my own proposal, which is intended to cover the situation in which we want to pool the individual opinions in order to ascribe an opinion to the group considered as an agent in its own right.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Social Sciences,Philosophy
Reference35 articles.
1. Adamčík, M., & Wilmers, G. (2014). Probabilistic merging operators. Logique et Analyse, 57(228), 563–590.
2. Bamber, J., & Aspinall, W. (2013). An expert judgement assessment of future sea level rise from the ice sheets. Nature Climate Change, 3, 424–7.
3. Bamber, J., Oppenheimer, M., Kopp, R., Aspinall, W., & Cooke, R. (2019). Ice sheet contributions to future sea-level rise from structured expert judgment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA, 166, 11195–11200.
4. Bradley, R. (2017). Decision theory with a human face. Cambridge University Press.
5. Bradley, S. (2019). Aggregating belief models. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 103, 38–48.