1
$\begingroup$

Given a $\sigma$-algebra $\scr F$ on $\Omega$, say that an accuracy scoring rule for $\scr F$ is a function $s$ from the set of all (countably additive) probabilities on $\scr F$ to the $\scr F$-measurable functions on $\Omega$ with values in $[-\infty,M]$ (for some fixed real $M$). A scoring rule $s$ is proper iff $\int_\Omega s(p) \, dp \ge \int_\Omega s(q) \, dp$ for all pairs of probabilities $p$ and $q$, and strictly proper if additionally equality only holds when $p=q$.

If $\scr F$ is countably generated, it has a strictly proper scoring rule (see my answer here). The same is true for any measure space that has only atomic probability measures, like the one here.

Question:

  1. Are there any strictly proper scoring rules for a $\scr F$ that is not countably generated and that has a nonatomic probability measure?

  2. If yes, is this true for all $\scr F$?

Note: The answer to (2) is negative if there are cases where there are more than ${\mathfrak c}^{|\Omega|}$ probability measures on $\scr F$. By a result of Paris and Koonen, it is relatively consistent with the existence of a measurable cardinal that there be a measurable cardinal $\kappa$ that has $2^{2^\kappa}$ normal measures, so it is relatively consistent with the existence of a measurable cardinal that the answer to (2) is negative.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ I guess a trivial positive answer to the first question arises by using your construction together with the $\sigma$-algebra of Lebesgue measurable sets. There are fewer measures and more measurable functions than with the Borel $\sigma$-algebra. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2, 2022 at 18:17
  • $\begingroup$ I don't see the "fewer measures" point. Is it true that any two measures that differ on Lebesgue measurable sets also differ on Borel sets? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2, 2022 at 20:43
  • $\begingroup$ The point is that there are Borel measures that do not extend to the $\sigma$-algebra of Lebesgue measurable sets. They might, for example, be atomless measures supported on the cantor set. But the Cantor set has Lebesgue measure zero and, therefore, every subset of the Cantor is Lebesgue measurable. So such an atomless Borel measure would have to extend to a power-set $\sigma$-algebra, which need not be possible. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2, 2022 at 20:48
  • $\begingroup$ Suppose $\mu$ and $\nu$ are measures on the Lebesgue algebra that agree on Borel sets, if there are such measures. Then my construction would assign the same score to $\mu$ and $\nu$, and hence wouldn't be strictly proper. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2, 2022 at 22:10
  • $\begingroup$ Good point! I actually don't know whether two measures that agree on Borel sets must agree on Lebesgue measurable sets. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 2, 2022 at 22:33

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

There is a somewhat boring positive answer to the first question. It is shown in [K. P. S. Bhaskara Rao, and B. V. Rao. Borel spaces. Warszawa: Instytut Matematyczny Polskiej Akademi Nauk, 1981.] on page 15 that the $\sigma$-algebra on $[0,1]$ generated by analytic sets is not countably generated. However, since analytic sets are universally measurable, every Borel probability measure has a unique extension to this $\sigma$-algebra. It follows that every proper scoring rule for the probability measures on $[0,1]$ with the Borel sets works also for this larger space that is not countably generated.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

The answer to 2 is negative. Let $\kappa$ be infinite and such that $2^\kappa > \kappa^\omega$ and let $X=2^\kappa$ with $\scr F$ being the coin-flip product $\sigma$-algebra (which is generated by sets that depend on a finite number of coordinates).

There are more probability measures on $\scr F$ than $\scr F$-measurable functions $X\to\mathbb R$, so no score can be a one-to-one function.

There are at least $2^\kappa$ probability measures (one per point, as $\scr F$ separates points).

And any measurable function depends on countably many coordinates (since the preimage of every interval with rational endpoints is is in $\scr F$ and hence depends on countably many coordinates, and the function is determined by these preimages). Since there are only continuum many real-valued measurable functions on $2^\omega$, there are at most $\kappa^\omega \times 2^\omega = \kappa^\omega$ measurable functions on $X$.

Note that if there is a strictly proper scoring rule on $2^\kappa$ for $\kappa>\lambda$, there is a strictly proper scoring rule on $2^\lambda$ (a measure on $2^\lambda$ can be extended to a measure on $2^\kappa$ by requiring the coin-flips in $\kappa\backslash\lambda$ to be all zero). Since $\kappa = \frak c$ satisfies the inequality $2^\kappa > \kappa^\omega$, it follows there is no strictly proper scoring rule on $2^\kappa$ for $\kappa \ge \frak c$.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .