On Feb 4, 2007, at 2:23 PM, gts wrote:
On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 13:15:27 -0500, Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
none of the existing AGI project is designed [according to the
tenets of objective/logical bayesianism]
Hmm. My impression is that to whatever extent AGI projects use
bayesian reasoning, they usually do so in a way that satisfies the
tenets of objective/logical bayesianism. I hope you understand I
mean "objective" in the epistemic and not the physical sense.
I see objective/logical bayesianism embodied in Jaynes' third
desiderata of probabilistic consistency, a principle that I doubt
all AGI projects reject, assuming any do. Those projects which do
allow for any compromise of that principle, if they exist, would I
think be better described as implementations of subjective rather
than objective bayesianism.
Novamente uses Bayes rule and other rules of probability theory, but
does NOT assume consistency of all knowledge in its knowledge base
(though maintaining approximate consistency is one of its goals).
I'm not sure what this says about its relationships to various
schools of philosophy of probability, though.
-- Ben
Of course this is only according to my understanding of these two
schools of bayesian thought and their differences, which may be
different from yours.
-gts
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
