This selection of papers encompasses recent methodological advances in several important areas, such as multivariate failure time data and interval censored data, as well as innovative applications of the existing theory and methods. Using a rigorous account of statistical forecasting efforts that led to the successful resolution of the John-Manville asbestos litigation, the models in this volume can be adapted to forecast industry-wide asbestos liability. More generally, because the models are not overly dependent on the U.S. legal system and the role of asbestos, this volume will be of interest in other product liability cases, as well as similar forecasting situations for a range of insurable or compensational events. Throughout the text, the emphasis is on the iterative nature of model building and the uncertainty generated by lack of complete knowledge of the injury process. This uncertainty is balanced against the court's need for a definitive settlement, and how these opposing principles can be reconciled. A valuable reference for researchers and practitioners in the field of survival analysis.

This selection of papers encompasses recent methodological advances in several important areas, such as multivariate failure time data and interval censored data, as well as innovative applications of the existing theory and methods. Using a rigorous account of statistical forecasting efforts that led to the successful resolution of the John-Manville asbestos litigation, the models in this volume can be adapted to forecast industry-wide asbestos liability. More generally, because the models are not overly dependent on the U.S. legal system and the role of asbestos, this volume will be of interest in other product liability cases, as well as similar forecasting situations for a range of insurable or compensational events. Throughout the text, the emphasis is on the iterative nature of model building and the uncertainty generated by lack of complete knowledge of the injury process. This uncertainty is balanced against the court's need for a definitive settlement, and how these opposing principles can be reconciled. A valuable reference for researchers and practitioners in the field of survival analysis.

Prediction models are important in various fields, including medicine, physics, meteorology, and finance. Prediction models will become more relevant in the medical field with the increase in knowledge on potential predictors of outcome, e.g. from genetics. Also, the number of applications will increase, e.g. with targeted early detection of disease, and individualized approaches to diagnostic testing and treatment. The current era of evidence-based medicine asks for an individualized approach to medical decision-making. Evidence-based medicine has a central place for meta-analysis to summarize results from randomized controlled trials; similarly prediction models may summarize the effects of predictors to provide individu- ized predictions of a diagnostic or prognostic outcome. Why Read This Book? My motivation for working on this book stems primarily from the fact that the development and applications of prediction models are often suboptimal in medical publications. With this book I hope to contribute to better understanding of relevant issues and give practical advice on better modelling strategies than are nowadays widely used. Issues include: (a) Better predictive modelling is sometimes easily possible; e.g. a large data set with high quality data is available, but all continuous predictors are dich- omized, which is known to have several disadvantages.

NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER • NAMED ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS OF THE YEAR BY THE ECONOMIST “The most important book on decision making since Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow.”—Jason Zweig, The Wall Street Journal Everyone would benefit from seeing further into the future, whether buying stocks, crafting policy, launching a new product, or simply planning the week’s meals. Unfortunately, people tend to be terrible forecasters. As Wharton professor Philip Tetlock showed in a landmark 2005 study, even experts’ predictions are only slightly better than chance. However, an important and underreported conclusion of that study was that some experts do have real foresight, and Tetlock has spent the past decade trying to figure out why. What makes some people so good? And can this talent be taught? In Superforecasting, Tetlock and coauthor Dan Gardner offer a masterwork on prediction, drawing on decades of research and the results of a massive, government-funded forecasting tournament. The Good Judgment Project involves tens of thousands of ordinary people—including a Brooklyn filmmaker, a retired pipe installer, and a former ballroom dancer—who set out to forecast global events. Some of the volunteers have turned out to be astonishingly good. They’ve beaten other benchmarks, competitors, and prediction markets. They’ve even beaten the collective judgment of intelligence analysts with access to classified information. They are "superforecasters." In this groundbreaking and accessible book, Tetlock and Gardner show us how we can learn from this elite group. Weaving together stories of forecasting successes (the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound) and failures (the Bay of Pigs) and interviews with a range of high-level decision makers, from David Petraeus to Robert Rubin, they show that good forecasting doesn’t require powerful computers or arcane methods. It involves gathering evidence from a variety of sources, thinking probabilistically, working in teams, keeping score, and being willing to admit error and change course. Superforecasting offers the first demonstrably effective way to improve our ability to predict the future—whether in business, finance, politics, international affairs, or daily life—and is destined to become a modern classic.

In a thorough reappraisal of the white-collar and corporate crime scene, this Second Edition builds on the first edition to complete the criminal narrative in an outstanding reference resource.

In 1993, the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., laid out a new test for federal trial judges to use when determining the admissibility of expert testimony. In Daubert, the Court ruled that judges should act as gatekeepers, assessing the reliability of the scientific methodology and reasoning that supports expert testimony. The resulting judicial screening of expert testimony has been particularly consequential. While the Supreme Court sought to bring better science into the courtroom, questions remain about whether the lower courts' application of Daubert accords with scientific practices. This report summarizes discussions held by an ad hoc committee of the The National Academies to consider the impact of Daubert and subsequent Supreme Court opinions and to identify questions for future study.