scholarly journals Balancing Expert Opinion and Historical Data: The Case of Baseball Umpires

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-163
Author(s):  
Ricardo Valerdi
Author(s):  
Gary Smith ◽  
Jay Cordes

There is a hierarchy of predictive value that can be extracted from data. At the top of the hierarchy are causal relationships that can be confirmed with a randomized and controlled experiment or a natural experiment. Next best is to establish known or hypothesized relationships ahead of time and then test them and estimate their relative importance. One notch lower are associations found in historical data that are tested on fresh data after considering whether or not they make sense. At the bottom of the hierarchy, with little or no value, are associations found in historical data that are not confirmed by expert opinion or tested with fresh data. Data scientists who use a “correlations are enough” approach should remember that the more data and the more searches, the more likely it is that a discovered statistical relationship is coincidental and useless.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 9
Author(s):  
Mohamed Habachi ◽  
Saâd Benbachir

Operational risk management remains a major concern for financial institutions. Indeed, institutions are bound to manage their own funds to hedge this risk. In this paper, we propose an approach to allocate one’s own funds based on a combination of historical data and expert opinion using the loss distribution approach (LDA) and Bayesian logic. The results show that internal models are of great importance in the process of allocating one’s own funds, and the use of the Delphi method for modelling expert opinion is very useful in ensuring the reliability of estimates.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document