The probability conflation: A reply to Tetlock et al.

We respond to Tetlock et al. (2022) showing (1) how expert judgment fails to reflect tail risk and (2) the lack of compatibility between forecasting tournaments and tail-risk assessment methods (such as extreme value theory). More importantly, we communicate a new result showing a greater gap between the properties of tail expectation and those of the corresponding probability.(c) 2023 International Institute of Forecasters. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

This article responds to Tetlock et al. (2022) by showing that expert judgment is not effective in capturing tail risk and that forecasting tournaments are not compatible with tail-risk assessment methods such as extreme value theory. Additionally, it presents a new finding demonstrating a significant gap between the properties of tail expectation and the corresponding probability.