Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Halpern and colleagues have shown that probability-like f... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Any inductive logic that employs the same probability functions to represent both the probabilities of evidence claims due to hypotheses and the probabilities of hypotheses due to evidence claims must be a Bayesian inductive logic.

    Halpern and colleagues have shown that probability-like functions satisfying weaker axiom sets (e.g., Dempster-Shafer belief functions) can coherently relate evidential support in both directions without collapsing into classical probability.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Key Terms

    Axiom sets(as the foundation for probability functions)
    A collection of basic rules or assumptions that a mathematical system is built on—think of them as the foundation rules that everything else follows from.
    Classical probability(as the standard system being compared to weaker systems)
    The traditional mathematical system for measuring likelihood, based on rules developed centuries ago (like the rule that probabilities must add up to 1).
    Coherently(as describing how these functions work together)
    In a way that is logically consistent and doesn't contradict itself.
    Collapsing into(as describing what these weaker systems avoid)
    Becoming the same as or reducing to something simpler; in this case, the alternative systems don't just become regular probability.
    Dempster-Shafer belief functions

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    (as an example of a weaker axiom system)
    A mathematical system for measuring uncertainty that allows you to assign confidence levels to possibilities without committing fully to traditional probability rules; useful when evidence doesn't neatly fit classical probability.
    Evidential support(as what the functions measure)
    The strength and quality of reasons or evidence that suggests something is true or false.
    Halpern(as a researcher referenced in probability theory)
    Joseph Halpern is a computer scientist and logician who studies how we reason about uncertainty and probability, especially in artificial intelligence and decision-making.
    Probability-like functions(as the main subject being discussed)
    Mathematical tools that measure how likely something is to be true, similar to probability but not necessarily following all the traditional rules of classical probability.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Any inductive logic that employs the same probability functions to represent bot...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective