Isn't this a case of trying to compare a theory with an application?
A theory that says there is a 83% chance of rain today, won't stop me
getting wet. But if I *apply* this theory and carry an umbrella, I might
stay dry.
A "perception-based theory of probabilistic reasoning" sounds like a very
interesting way of applying probability theory, plus a few extensions, to
real world problems, but surely it is only one such approach. I suggest:
theory + assumptions + "real-world translation" = useable
application
PTp is one such application. Bayes belief nets are another. I'm sure there
are many more.
Regards,
David Corney
Computer Science Dept.
UCL (University College London)
On Thursday, August 03, 2000 12:19 AM, Michelle T. Lin
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> [Forwarded from the Berkeley Institute for Soft Computing mailing list
> with permission of L. A. Zadeh - bda]
>
> *********************************************************************
> Berkeley Initiative in Soft Computing (BISC)
> *********************************************************************
>
> To: BISC Group
> From: L. A. Zadeh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> A Challenge to Bayesians (augmented version)
> -------------------------
>
>
> The past two decades have witnessed a dramatic growth in the
> use of probability-based methods in a wide variety of applications
> centering on automation of decision-making in an environment of
> uncertainty and incompleteness of information.
>
> Successes of probability theory have high visibility. But what
> is not widely recognized is that successes of probability theory mask
> a fundamental limitation -- the inability to operate on what may be
> called perception-based information. Such information is exemplified
> by the following. Assume that I look at a box containing balls of
> various sizes and form the perceptions: (a) there are about twenty
> balls; (b) most are large; and (c) a few are small. The question is:
> What is the probability that a ball drawn at random is neither
> large nor small? Probability theory cannot answer this question
> because there is no mechanism within the theory to represent the
> meaning of perceptions in a form that lends itself to computation. The
..
