Probably just because its definition is simpler than logarithmic scoring. Do you think it is obvious that logarithmic scoring is better? That doesn’t seem obvious to me.
The Brier score becomes inadequate for very rare (or very frequent) events, because it does not sufficiently discriminate between small changes in forecast that are significant for rare events.
I guess it’s more probability-centric than odds-centric.
OK, so basically it’s well-known that this only works for predictions that aren’t super rare, so it wouldn’t be used to score things that only happen 0.1% of the time on average (which is the only way anyone could be 99.9% accurate).
Wait, why would anyone use that? So confused.
Probably just because its definition is simpler than logarithmic scoring. Do you think it is obvious that logarithmic scoring is better? That doesn’t seem obvious to me.
From Wikipedia:
I guess it’s more probability-centric than odds-centric.
OK, so basically it’s well-known that this only works for predictions that aren’t super rare, so it wouldn’t be used to score things that only happen 0.1% of the time on average (which is the only way anyone could be 99.9% accurate).