arXiv:2601.13362v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This study explores how Bayesian networks (BNs) can improve forecast accuracy compared to logistic regression and recalibration and aggregation methods, using data from the Good Judgment Project. Regularized logistic regression models and a baseline recalibrated aggregate were compared to two types of BNs: structure-learned BNs with arcs between predictors, and naive BNs. Four predictor variables were examined: absolute difference from the aggregate, forecast value, days prior to question close, and mean standardized Brier score. Results indicated the recalibrated aggregate achieved the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.985), followed by both types of BNs, then the logistic regression models. Performance of the BNs was likely harmed by reduced info…
arXiv:2601.13362v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This study explores how Bayesian networks (BNs) can improve forecast accuracy compared to logistic regression and recalibration and aggregation methods, using data from the Good Judgment Project. Regularized logistic regression models and a baseline recalibrated aggregate were compared to two types of BNs: structure-learned BNs with arcs between predictors, and naive BNs. Four predictor variables were examined: absolute difference from the aggregate, forecast value, days prior to question close, and mean standardized Brier score. Results indicated the recalibrated aggregate achieved the highest accuracy (AUC = 0.985), followed by both types of BNs, then the logistic regression models. Performance of the BNs was likely harmed by reduced information from the discretization process and violation of the assumption of linearity likely harmed the logistic regression models. Future research should explore hybrid approaches combining BNs with logistic regression, examine additional predictor variables, and account for hierarchical data dependencies.