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
    The No-Free-Lunch theorems show that if a uniform distrib... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The uniform-distribution defense of inductive inference fails.

    The No-Free-Lunch theorems show that if a uniform distribution is placed over all logically possible sequences of future events, any learning algorithm is expected to have a generalisation error of 1/2.

    Modality & PossibilitySkepticism
    ?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.

    Topics

    SkepticismModality & Possibility

    Key Terms

    Generalisation error(as used in machine learning)
    A measure of how badly a learning system performs on new, unseen situations it hasn't been trained on (as opposed to situations it has already learned from).
    Learning algorithm(as used in artificial intelligence and machine learning)
    A step-by-step procedure that a computer or system uses to figure out patterns from data and make predictions about new situations.
    No-Free-Lunch theorems

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    (Machine learning theory; interpreted as formal versions of Hume's first fork)
    Formal theorems establishing that there are a priori possible situations in which any given algorithm does not perform well, implying no algorithm can be demonstratively guaranteed to perform well across all possible situations
    uniform distribution(Probability theory applied to message sets)
    A probability distribution in which each element x of a set S is selected with equal probability 1/|S|

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge2 linked

    Related

    A generalisation error of 1/2 means the learning algorithm does no better than g...The uniform-distribution defense of inductive inference fails.

    Similar

    A generalisation error of 1/2 means the learning algorithm does no bet...82%The No-Free-Lunch theorems establish that there are a priori possible ...81%The No-Free-Lunch theorems show that no contradiction arises from an a...76%For explanatory analogies and mathematical analogies, the uniformity i...74%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: induction-problem
    View source passageHide passage
    Premise P3 can perhaps be challenged on the grounds that a priori justifications can also be given for contingent propositions. Even though an inductive inference can fail in some possible situations, it could still be reasonable to form an expectation of reliability if we spread our credence equally over all the possibilities and have reason to think (or at least no reason to doubt) that the cases where inductive inference is unreliable require a ‘very specific arrangement of things’ and thus

    Details

    Type
    premise
    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