While a simple information market lets one trade on the probability of each value of a single variable, a full combinatorial information market lets one trade on any combination of values of a set of variables, including any conditional or joint probability. In laboratory experiments, we compare the accuracy of simple markets, two kinds of combinatorial markets, a call market and a market maker, isolated individuals who report to a scoring rule, and two ways to combine those individual reports into a group prediction. We consider two environments with asymmetric information on sparsely correlated binary variables, one with three subjects and three variables, and the other with six subjects and eight variables (and so 256 states). ∗ For their comments, we thank David Porter, Ryan Oprea, and participants of seminars at George Mason

In this paper, we examine the relative forecast accuracy of information markets versus expert aggregation. We leverage a unique data source of almost 2000 people’s subjective probability judgments on 2003 US National Football League games and compare with the “market probabilities ” given by two different information markets on exactly the same events. We combine assessments of multiple experts via linear and logarithmic aggregation functions to form pooled predictions. Prices in information markets are used to derive market predictions. Our results show that, at the same time point ahead of the game, information markets provide as accurate predictions as pooled expert assessments. In screening pooled expert predictions, we find that arithmetic average is a robust and efficient pooling function; weighting expert assessments according to their past performance does not improve accuracy of pooled predictions; and logarithmic aggregation functions offer bolder predictions than linear aggregation functions. The results provide insights into the predictive performance of information markets, and the relative merits of selecting among various opinion pooling methods.

Designing efficient bidding strategies for sequential auctions represents an important, open problem area in agent-mediated electronic markets. In existing literature, a variety of bidding strategies have been proposed and have been shown to perform with varying degrees of efficiency. However, most of strategies proposed so far do not explicitly model bidders attitudes towards risk which, in mainstream economic literature, is considered an essential attribute in modeling agent preferences and decision making under uncertainty. This paper studies the effect that risk profiles (modeled through the standard Arrow-Pratt risk aversion measure), have on the bidders strategies in sequential auctions. First, the sequential decision process involved in bidding is modeled as a Markov Decision Process. Then, the effect that a bidders risk aversion has on her decision theoretic optimal bidding policy is analyzed, for a category of expectations of future price distributions. This analysis is performed separately for the case of first price and second-price sequential auctions. Next, the bidding strategies developed above are simulated, in order to study the effect that an agents risk aversion has on the chances of winning a set of complementary-valued items. The paper concludes with an experimental study of how the presence of risk-averse bidders affects both bidder profits and auctioneer revenue, for different market scenarios of increasing complexity. 1

On behalf of:

Sigatures are on file in the Graduate School. iii In almost all walks of life, predicting uncertain future events plays an essential role in decision-making processes. However, information related to future events frequently exists only as dispersed opinions, insights, and intuitions of individuals. Each individual only knows a little, but aggregating the dispersed information together may make considerable contribution to decision making. This is typical in many domains including business, politics, and entertainment. Therefore, how to aggregate such dispersed information for useful decision support is a crucial task. Markets have shown great potential as one of the most effective mechanisms for gathering distributed information and generating accurate forecasts, often surpassing many existing methods in practice. This research studies information markets, markets that are specially designed for information aggregation and forecasting, from four different perspectives: theoretical examination, experimental evaluation, empirical analysis, and design.

The main objective of this research is to use prediction markets as negotiation agents, for supporting R&D portfolio management. To support this research, we iteratively designed, developed, operated and evaluated several prototypes. We start by presenting the weaknesses of the current techniques for managing R&D portfolio. Then, we intend to demonstrate that prediction markets correct these weaknesses in R&D portfolio management. Furthermore, following a design science paradigm, we illustrate the design of our artifacts using build-andevaluate loops supported with a field study, which consisted in operating the prediction markets in different settings. 1.

We propose a model of prediction markets where participants are biased according to their social relationships. We relax the standard assumption of complete rationality and adopt an arguably more realistic model where agents are disproportionally influenced by their neighbors in a social network. We conduct extensive agent-based simulations of our model. We find that prices in prediction markets remain accurate even when participants are biased and irrational. Moreover, accuracy is robust to changes in many factors, including how individuals are motivated to participate in the market, the way that individuals use public information, individual utility functions, the topology of the social network, and the strength of social influences. Our model can explain the high volume of trade often observed in speculative markets that is hard or impossible to explain under standard market rationality assumptions. Our model can also explain the documented ability of prediction markets to succeed even in the face of biased and irrational participants.

In this thesis, we investigated how sociometric information can be used to improve different methods of aggregating dispersed information. We specifically compared four different approaches of information aggregation: vanilla opinion poll, opinion polls where sociometric data is inferred from the population’s own perception of social connectivity, opinion polls where sociometric data is obtained independent of the populations beliefs and data aggregation using market mechanisms. On comparing the entropy of the error of between the prediction of each of these different methods with the truth, preliminary results suggest that sociometric data does indeed improve the enterprise of information aggregation. The results also raise interesting questions about the relevance and application of different kinds of sociometric data as well as the somewhat surprising efficiency of information market mechanisms.