Jef, The following is a direct cut and paste from you Fri 11/9/2007 2:46 PM post to which I was responding in my Fri 11/9/2007 5:26 PM post, which you unjustly flame in the email below.
======start of cut and paste from Jefs email=========== > > MY COMMENT>>>> At Dragon System, then one of the world's leading > > speech recognition companies, I was repeatedly told by our in-house > > PhD in statistics that "likelihood" is the measure of a hypothesis > > matching, or being supported by, evidence. Dragon selected speech > > recognition word candidates based on the likelihood that the > > probability distribution of their model matched the acoustic > > evidence provided by an event, i.e., a spoken utterance. > > If you said Dragon selected word candidates based on their probability > distribution relative to the likelihood function supported by the > evidence provided by acoustic events I'd be with you there. As it is, > when you say "based on the likelihood that the probability..." it > seems you are confusing the subjective with the objective and, for me, > meaning goes out the door. Edward, can you explain what you might have meant by "based on the likelihood that the probability..."? ======end of cut and paste from Jefs email=========== The last sentence in this cut and paste is the one you have just denied making in the below email, word for word, character for character. This stuff is on the list so other people can check it. So if you are going to make such obviously and easily provably falsehoods and go into a tizzy again, I guess there really is no point continuing this conversation. Ed Porter -----Original Message----- From: Jef Allbright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 5:42 PM To: agi@v2.listbox.com Subject: Re: [agi] How valuable is Solmononoff Induction for real world AGI? On 11/9/07, Edward W. Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >JEF ######> Edward, can you explain what you might have meant by > >"based on > the likelihood that the probability..."? > > ED ######> I think my statement -- "Dragon selected speech > recognition word candidates based on the likelihood that the > probability distribution of their model matched the acoustic evidence" > -- maps directly into your statement that -- "likelihood is simply the > probability of some data." How bizarre. Clearly that's not what I said, and I won't waste any more time on this. <plonk> ----- 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/?&; ----- 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/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=63707189-2c5605
