Election predictions are arbitrage-free: response to Taleb

Aubrey Clayton

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: Taleb (2018) claimed a novel approach to evaluating the quality of probabilistic election forecasts via no-arbitrage pricing techniques and argued that popular forecasts of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election had violated arbitrage boundaries. We show that under mild assumptions all such political forecasts are arbitrage-free and that the heuristic that Taleb's argument was based on is false.

Date: 2019-07
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.01576 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:1907.01576

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().