Do We Need Higher-Order Probabilities and, If So, What Do They Mean?

03/27/2013
by   Judea Pearl, et al.
0

The apparent failure of individual probabilistic expressions to distinguish uncertainty about truths from uncertainty about probabilistic assessments have prompted researchers to seek formalisms where the two types of uncertainties are given notational distinction. This paper demonstrates that the desired distinction is already a built-in feature of classical probabilistic models, thus, specialized notations are unnecessary.

READ FULL TEXT
POST COMMENT

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Authors

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

page 5

page 6

page 7

page 8

04/13/2021

Extensional Denotational Semantics of Higher-Order Probabilistic Programs, Beyond the Discrete Case

We describe a mathematical structure that can give extensional denotatio...
09/16/2021

A Cautionary Tale of Decorrelating Theory Uncertainties

A variety of techniques have been proposed to train machine learning cla...
03/27/2013

Higher Order Probabilities

A number of writers have supposed that for the full specification of bel...
05/01/2018

Probabilistic Stable Functions on Discrete Cones are Power Series (long version)

We study the category Cstabm of measurable cones and measurable stable f...
02/19/2020

Imprecise Probability for Multiparty Session Types in Process Algebra

In this paper we introduce imprecise probability for session types. More...
07/27/2021

A Tale Of Two Long Tails

As machine learning models are increasingly employed to assist human dec...
02/28/2019

Buffered environmental contours

The main idea of this paper is to use the notion of buffered failure pro...
This week in AI

Get the week's most popular data science and artificial intelligence research sent straight to your inbox every Saturday.