Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TISB TISB: Gruppo del Tau1 TISB 18.Maggio.2001 Sesto Fiorentino Gruppo di lavoro sul : Status report Giuseppe Bagliesi Simone Gennai Giacomo.
Advertisements

1 Integrated Water Management EES David Zetland Environmental Economics and Natural Resources Group Nov 6: Economic aspects and challenges in IWM.
3/3/2004Hanoch Levy, CS, TAU1 What Quality of Service is About Hanoch Levy Feb 2004.
Eliciting Honest Feedback 1.Eliciting Honest Feedback: The Peer-Prediction Model (Miller, Resnick, Zeckhauser) 2.Minimum Payments that Reward Honest Feedback.
3/24//2004Fairness in Queues, H. Levy, CS, TAU1 How Fair is your Queue March, 2004 Hanoch Levy School of Computer Science, Tel Aviv University Jointly.
Hansons Market Scoring Rules Robin Hanson, Logarithmic Market Scoring Rules for Modular Combinatorial Information Aggregation, Robin Hanson, Combinatorial.
Combinatorial Betting Rick Goldstein and John Lai.
Presented By: Ofir Chen Based on: Designing Markets for Prediction by Yilling Chen and David M. Pennock 2010.
5 P’s.
3/2/2001Hanoch Levy, CS, TAU1 Basic Communications Protocols Workshop on QoS Hanoch Levy Feb 2004.
Class 4 – Some applications of revenue equivalence
Approximating optimal combinatorial auctions for complements using restricted welfare maximization Pingzhong Tang and Tuomas Sandholm Computer Science.
Mechanism Design, Machine Learning, and Pricing Problems Maria-Florina Balcan.
Non myopic strategy Truth or Lie?. Scoring Rules One important feature of market scoring rules is that they are myopic strategy proof. That means that.
Seminar in Auctions and Mechanism Design Based on J. Hartline’s book: Approximation in Economic Design Presented by: Miki Dimenshtein & Noga Levy.
Asymmetric Information and Bubbles: An Experiment Michael Brandner Jürgen Huber Michael Kirchler Matthias Sutter all University of Innsbruck.
© 2007 Bart J. Wilson B1 Buyer 1 UnitValue 1 st $9 2 nd $6 3 rd $3 Buyer 1’s Demand.
Optimal auction design Roger Myerson Mathematics of Operations research 1981.
Markets As a Forecasting Tool Yiling Chen School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Harvard University Based on work with Lance Fortnow, Sharad Goel,
Multi-Unit Auctions 1. Many auctions involve the sale of multiple similar or identical units. Cases of wine at an auction house, carbon permits, shares.
SUCCESSFUL COMBINATION INTERNET MARKETING BUSINESS FROM HOME.
DECISION MARKETS WITH GOOD INCENTIVES Yiling Chen (Harvard), Ian Kash (Harvard), Internet and Network Economics, 2011.
Rational Expectations and the Aggregation of Diverse Information in Laboratory Security Markets Charles R. Plott, Shyam Sunder.
A New Understanding of Prediction Markets via No-Regret Learning.
Chap 5 Numerical Methods for Simple Options.  NPV is forced to treat future courses of action as mutually exclusive, ROA can combine them into a single.
Reducing Costly Information Acquisition in Auctions Kate Larson, University of Waterloo Presented by David Thompson, University of British Columbia July.
Robust Mechanisms for Information Elicitation Aviv Zohar & Jeffrey S. Rosenschein.
The Politics of Information Markets, and Information Markets in Politics Adam Meirowitz Joshua Tucker Princeton University.
Information Markets II: Theory, Outputs, Inputs, Foul Play, Combinatorics, Applications Robin Hanson Economics George Mason University.
1 Information Markets & Decision Makers Yiling Chen Anthony Kwasnica Tracy Mullen Penn State University This research was supported by the Defense Advanced.
An Experimental Test of Information & Decision Markets Robin Hanson, Takashi Ishikida and John Ledyard Caltech 2/4/ minute presentation!
Exchanges = markets with many buyers and many sellers Let’s consider a 1-item 1-unit exchange first.
Adverse Selection Model I A simple model. Assumptions  True value (v) follows a uniform distribution over [-1, 1].  Everybody knows the distribution,
A Unified Framework for Dynamic Pari-mutuel Information Market Yinyu Ye Stanford University Joint work with Agrawal (CS), Delage (EE), Peters (MS&E), and.
CPS Securities & Expressive Securities Markets Vincent Conitzer
Upending Stock Market Structure Using MPC CHARANJIT S. JUTLA IBM RESEARCH.
OPTIONS MEISTER Module 5 –Standard Deviation and Its’ Relationship to Probabilities.
A Utility Framework for Bounded-Loss Market Makers
Collective Revelation: A Mechanism for Self-Verified, Weighted, and Truthful Predictions Sharad Goel, Daniel M. Reeves, David M. Pennock Presented by:
Zocalo and Prediction Markets Design Chris Hibbert Principal Investigator CommerceNet Prediction Markets Summit UCSF Mission Bay December 2, 2005.
Jake Bernstein CSTA/MTA Annual Conference Toronto 6-7 December 2010 High Odds Patterns in Stocks and Futures 100% Rule-Based Trading.
Chapter 12: Market Microstructure and Strategies
Exotic Options BA Financial Markets and Institutions Chavanun Yainuknaen (SEA) Spring 2013.
The Marketing Functions
An Example: Buying and Selling on a Market (Instructions) In the following experiment you are either a buyer or a seller. The experiment is partitioned.
Pricing Combinatorial Markets for Tournaments Presented by Rory Kulz.
Auction Theory תכנון מכרזים ומכירות פומביות Topic 7 – VCG mechanisms 1.
Exchange Market for Combinatorial Orders Committee: Eugene Fink Dmitry B. Goldgof Sudeep Sarkar Jenny Y. Hu.
Optimal mechanisms (part 2) seminar in auctions & mechanism design Presentor : orel levy.
An Introduction to Prediction Markets (a.k.a. Idea Futures, Decision Markets, Information Markets, and Event Markets) Presented by: Muhammad Daniyal Shafiq.
Ch. 9 Stewarding Multiple Channels I.Meaning II.The Underlying Reasons I.Market Maturation II.Sales Growth Goals III.Evolution of Customer Demand IV. Availability.
PERSONAL TRAINING As a Profit Center THE PLATINUM SERIES The System That Works A FitTrac Module.
Confidential – Not for Distribution Efficient Reinsurance Management of Health Claims Portfolios October 29, th CCHFI, Turks & Caicos Islands.
An Introduction to Prediction Markets (a.k.a. Idea Futures, Decision Markets, Information Markets, and Event Markets) alex kirtland / UsableMarkets 25.
The Apple Market Debrief. 1. At what price were apples most frequently sold in round Three?
Three Minimal Market Institutions: Theory and Experimental Evidence Martin Shubik, Yale Shyam.
Exercise1: Mullineaux Co
Econ 339X, Spring 2011 ECON 339X: Agricultural Marketing Chad Hart Assistant Professor John Lawrence Professor
1. We go under contract to buy your home. We list the property and promote it.
Graphing Notes Graphs – diagrams telling how two variables or factors are related Graphs – diagrams telling how two variables or factors are related Show.
CPS Proper scoring rules Vincent Conitzer
Chance Experiments with Outcomes that are not Equally Likely.
Toward An Understanding of Self-Organization of Markets Yougui Wang Department of Systems Science, School of Management, Beijing Normal University, Beijing.
Market Scoring Rules
Daily TEKS Objectives February 3, 2014
US Election Prediction Markets: Applications of Parimutuel Call Auction Mechanisms Mark Peters November 25, /22/2018.
Adverse Selection Model I
Cost Functions and Utility-Based Market Makers
THE NORMAL DISTRIBUTION AND THE 68–95–99.7% RULE
Chapter 12 Vocabulary.
Presentation transcript:

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Logarithmic Market Scoring Rules for Modular Combinatorial Information Aggregation [Robin Hanson, 2002] Roi Meron 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Outline Scoring Rules Market Scoring Rules Logarithmic Market Scoring Rule(LMSR) Distribution == Cost function Combinatorial Markets 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Event Ω={ 𝑤 1 … 𝑤 𝑛 } finite set of 𝑛 outcomes (mutually exclusive and exhaustive states of the world) Example: all possible prime ministers in elections ’13 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Scoring Rule 𝑝 𝑖 - Agent’s belief about the probability that state 𝑤 𝑖 will occur. 𝑆 𝑖 ( 𝑟 ) is the payment made to agent who reports distribution 𝑟 if outcome is 𝑤 𝑖 . 𝐸 𝑝𝑎𝑦𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 𝑖=1 𝑛 𝑝 𝑖 𝑆 𝑖 𝑟 A proper scoring rule is when 𝑝 = argmax 𝑟 𝑖=1 𝑛 𝑝 𝑖 𝑆 𝑖 𝑟 Strictly proper: when 𝑝 is unique Forecaster’s Expected payment 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Exercise Is the following (binary)scoring rule proper? 1− 𝑥−𝑟 2 where 𝑟 is the probability that 𝑥 will happen (This is a variation of brier scoring rule) 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Exercise Is the following (binary)scoring rule proper? 1− 𝑥−𝑟 2 where 𝑟 is the probability that 𝑥 will happen 1−𝑝 1−𝑟 2 − 1−𝑝 𝑟 2 Derivative w.r.t. 𝑟 and comparing to 0 gives: −2𝑟𝑝+2𝑝−2𝑟 1−𝑝 =0 2𝑝=2𝑟 𝑝=𝑟 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Logarithmic Scoring Rule 𝑟 𝑖 ≤1 𝑎 𝑖 needs to be big enough for agents to participate The only strictly proper scoring rule in which the score for outcome 𝑖 depends only on 𝑟 𝑖 and not on the probabilities given to 𝑟 𝑗 for 𝑗≠𝑖 An agent’s payoff depends only on the probability he assigned to the actual event and not the ones that didn’t happen 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Logarithmic Scoring Rule 𝑟 𝑖 ≤1 𝑎 𝑖 needs to be big enough for agents to participate The only strictly proper scoring rule in which the score for outcome 𝑖 depends only on 𝑟 𝑖 and not on the probabilities given to 𝑟 𝑗 for 𝑗≠𝑖 Example: Quadratic Scoring Rule 𝑆 𝑖 𝑟 =2 𝑟 𝑖 − 𝑗=1 𝑛 𝑟 𝑗 2 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU LSR is local Therefore, we can look at a 𝑛-valued event as 𝑛 binary events and score remains the same. Instead of betting on the winner of elections 13’, we can bet whether candidate 𝑖 will win or not, for all candidates. Complexity issue (open question) 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Properness - simple case proof Assume we have 2 possible outcomes. Agent’s expected payment: 𝑝 log 𝑟 + 1−𝑝 log (1−𝑟) Derivative w.r.t. 𝑟 gives: 𝑝 𝑟 − 1−𝑝 1−𝑟 =0⇒𝑝−𝑟𝑝−𝑟+𝑟𝑝=0 𝑝=𝑟 Second derivative is negative. Logarithmic scoring rule is proper. 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Objective We want multiple agents(traders) to share their beliefs Without paying each one We want a single(unified) prediction. One option is a standard market(Double auction information markets) What happens in thin markets? 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Market Scoring Rule Market maker starts with an initial distribution 𝑟 0 . At each step, an agent reports his distribution. The report should be honest if we use LMSR. Why? The agent pays to the previous agent according to the scoring rule 𝑆 𝑥 𝑖 =Δ 𝑠 𝑖 𝑟 𝑡 , 𝑟 𝑡−1 = 𝑠 𝑖 𝑟 𝑡 − 𝑠 𝑖 ( 𝑟 𝑡−1 ) The market maker finally pays Δ 𝑠 𝑖 𝑟 𝑡 , 𝑟 0 LMSR is proper Simple scoring rules do not give us common(joined) estimates. Simple markets need people to bet on the same event and give them no incentive to do it. MSR give incentive for experts to participate and do not require them to find a counterparty. Assume that a single person knows something about an event and the rest know that they know nothing about the event, then, standard market cannot acquire the person’s information. Irrational participation problem – once rational agents have hedged their risk, they should not want to trade each other even when they have substantial private information 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Market Scoring Rule(2) Market maker subsidizes the reward for accurate predictions: Gives incentive to participate and share your knowledge Increases liquidity Easy to expand to multiple outcomes 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Market Scoring Rule(3) If only one agent participates, it is equivalent to simple scoring rule. If many agents participate, it gives the same effect of a standard information market, at the cost of the payment to the last agent. For any scoring rule, an agent should volentarily agree this kind of payment, because he can choose not to participate simple information market: .001 estimates – thick market –gives good accuracy (with many traders focusing on a single event). When we have few traders, market becomes thin and traders do not participate and accuracy declines. Simple Scoring Rule – Thick market = opinion pooling problem. Many estimates per trader = hard to guess what is correct Market Scoring Rule – combine the 2. combining opinions and anyone can change opinion to maximize his profit – better prediction. 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Logarithmic Market Scoring Rule (LMSR) Reminder: 𝑆 𝑖 𝑟 = 𝑎 𝑖 +𝑏 log ( 𝑟 𝑖 ) 𝑏 is a parameter that controls: liquidity loss of the market maker Adaptivity of the market maker. * Large 𝑏 values allow a trader to buy many shares at the current price without affecting the price drastically. Market maker’s worst case expected loss is the entropy of the initial distribution he gives, 𝜋 −𝑏 Σ 𝑖 𝜋 𝑖 log 𝜋 𝑖 Adaptivity – We will see that in terms of inventory, it reduces the cost of Maximum expected payment in cases where the agent eventually becomes sure of the actual state i 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Typically, initial distribution is uniform, i.e. 𝑝 𝑖 = 1 𝑛 where 𝑛 is the number of possible outcomes. Market maker’s loss is bounded by blog 𝑛 . 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

how do we implement a market? 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Distribution is equal to Buying and Selling shares We can think of the market maker scoring rule as an automated market maker that: Holds a list 𝑞={𝑞 𝑖 } of how many units of the form “pays 1$ if the state is 𝑖” were sold (outstanding shares). Has an instantaneous price 𝑝 ( 𝑝 𝑖 for any outcome). Will accept any fair bet. Its main task is to extract information implicit in the trades others make with it, in order to infer a new rational price. The rational: people buying suggest that the price is too low and selling suggest that the price is too high. 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU LMSR price function Let 𝑖 be the outcome which finally took place. The market maker pays exactly 𝑞 𝑖 $. A Dollar to any share holder. On the other hand, it should be equal to the payment using LSR. We want a price function such that: 𝑆 𝑖 𝑝 𝑖 = 𝑞 𝑖 The price function is the current distribution “given” by the last agent. 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU LMSR price function(2) The price function is the inverse of the scoring rule function 𝑝 𝑖 𝑞 = 𝑒 𝑞 𝑖 − 𝑎 𝑖 /𝑏 𝑘 𝑒 𝑞 𝑘 − 𝑎 𝑘 /𝑏 A large trade can be described by a series of “tiny” trades between 𝑡 𝑠 to 𝑡 𝑒 . The price of this trade event is given by integrating over 𝑝 𝑖 in the range of [ 𝑡 𝑠 , 𝑡 𝑒 ]. Probabilities represent prices for (very) small trades. 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU LMSR cost function 𝐶 𝑞 =𝑏 log 𝑖=1 𝑛 𝑒 (𝑞 𝑖 /𝑏) Let’s assume no short selling, so 𝑞 ∈ ℕ 0 𝑛 For simplification, assume we have only 2 possible outcomes, then: 𝐶 𝑞 0 , 𝑞 1 =𝑏 log ( 𝑒 (𝑞 0 /𝑏) + 𝑒 (𝑞 1 /𝑏) ) 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU “How much?” Buying 𝑞 𝑖 <0 shares means Selling 𝑞 𝑖 . Say someone wants to buy 20 shares of outcome 0. He pays: 𝐶 𝑞 0 +20, 𝑞 1 −𝐶 𝑞 0 , 𝑞 1 In general, if a trader changes the outstanding volume from 𝑞 𝑖 to 𝑞 𝑖 ∗ , the payment is: 𝐶 𝑞 0 ∗ , 𝑞 1 ∗ −𝐶 𝑞 0 , 𝑞 1 If 𝑞 0 ∗ < 𝑞 0 , i.e. selling, then the cost is negative, as expected. People might find this version of LMSR more natural. Buying and Selling instead of probabilities estimation. 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Equivalence proof Trader’s profit if 𝑖 happens = 𝑞 𝑖 ′ − 𝑞 𝑖 − 𝐶 𝑞 ′ −𝐶 𝑞 = 𝑞 𝑖 ′ − 𝑞 𝑖 − log 𝑗 𝑒 𝑞 𝑗 ′ − log 𝑗 𝑒 𝑞 𝑗 = log 𝑒 𝑞 𝑖 ′ − log 𝑒 𝑞 𝑖 − log 𝑗 𝑒 𝑞 𝑗 ′ − log 𝑗 𝑒 𝑞 𝑗 = log 𝑒 𝑞 𝑖 ′ 𝑗 𝑒 𝑞 𝑗 ′ − log 𝑒 𝑞 𝑖 𝑗 𝑒 𝑞 𝑗 = log [𝑝 𝑖 𝑞 ′ ] − log [ 𝑝 𝑖 𝑞 ] = a logarithmic scoring rule payment 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Example 𝜋 ⅇ 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Will Wile E. Coyote fall off a cliff next year? 𝑏=100 𝑞 0 = 𝑞 1 =0 Uniform priors: 𝑝 0 = 𝑝 1 = 1 2 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Will Wile E. Coyote fall off a cliff next year? 𝑏=100 𝑞 0 = 𝑞 1 =0 Uniform priors: 𝑝 0 = 𝑝 1 = 1 2 Bugs arrives and buys 10 shares of outcome 0 𝐶 10,0 −𝐶 0,0 =100⋅ ln 𝑒 10 100 + 𝑒 0 − 100⋅ ln 𝑒 0 + 𝑒 0 =74.44−69.31=5.13$ Daffy buys 10 shares of outcome 1 𝐶 10,10 −𝐶 10,0 =100⋅ ln 𝑒 10 100 + 𝑒 10 100 − 100⋅ ln 𝑒 10 100 + 𝑒 0 =79.31−74.44=4.87$ RoadRunner runs and buys 40 shares of outcome 0 𝐶 50,10 −𝐶 10,10 =100⋅ ln 𝑒 50 100 + 𝑒 10 100 − 100⋅ ln 𝑒 10 100 + 𝑒 10 100 =101.3−79.31=21.99$ Bugs returns and sell his 10 shares of outcome 0 𝐶 40,10 −𝐶 50,10 =100⋅ ln 𝑒 40 100 + 𝑒 10 100 − 100⋅ ln 𝑒 50 100 + 𝑒 10 100 =95.44−101.3=−𝟓.𝟖𝟔$ And the current quote of “0” is: 𝑝 0 40,10 = 𝑒 0.4 𝑒 0.4 + 𝑒 0.1 =0.57 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Combinatorial Markets Say we bet on the chances of rain of the following week. 𝒜- will it rain on Sunday ∈{0,1} ℬ- will it rain on Monday 𝒞- will it rain on Tuesday We can think of other events: B|𝐴 rain on Monday given it rains on Sunday… Ideally, trading on the probability of 𝐵 given 𝐴 should not result in a change in the probability of 𝐴 or a change in prob. “𝐴 given C”. But in fact….. 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

LMSR local inference rule Logarithmic rule bets on “A given B” preserve p(𝐵) and, for any event 𝐶 preserve p 𝐶 𝐴𝐵 𝑝(𝐶| 𝐴 𝐵) and 𝑝(𝐶| 𝐵 ). The other direction also holds. In other words: All MSR except LMSR might change 𝑝(𝐵). LMSR preserve it and probabilities regarding any other event 𝐶. 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Combinatorial Product Space Given 𝑁 variables each with 𝑉 outcomes, a single market scoring rule can make trades on any of the 𝑉 𝑁 possible states, or any of the 2 𝑉 𝑁 possible events. Creating a data structure to explicitly store the probability of every state is unfeasible for large values of 𝑁. Computational complexity of updating prices and assets is NP-complete in worst-case. 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU

Seminar in Information Markets, TAU Thank you 07-Nov-12 Seminar in Information Markets, TAU