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 same formal mechanism of plausibility update can be a... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Plausibility updates in sequential games during actual play differ in interpretation from plausibility updates used in pregame deliberation for Backward Induction.

    The same formal mechanism of plausibility update can be applied in both contexts.

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?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

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    2 topics

    Skepticism2 linkedPerception

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    1 linked

    Related

    During actual game play, plausibility updates result from observing real moves m...In pregame deliberation, plausibility updates represent steps in reasoning befor...Plausibility updates in sequential games during actual play differ in interpreta...

    Similar

    Such updates can only change the agent's plausibility ordering among d...80%Increased systematicity does not always increase plausibility79%For some assertions, iterated upgrades lead to divergent plausibility ...78%Reduced systematicity does not always decrease plausibility78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: logics-for-games
    View source passageHide passage
    Certain types of information may be judged inconclusive or not fully reliable. While unsuitable for advancing knowledge, such information may prompt agents to alter some of their beliefs. Such inconclusive evidence often concerns expectations concerning opponents’ player types. Leaving aside the possibility of mere mistakes, all moves can be assumed to result from intentional, strategic considerations. By interpreting opponents’ past moves, agents may hence infer about their beliefs, preferences

    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