Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||Direct inference derives values for definite (single-case) probabilities from those of related indefinite (general) probabilities. But direct inference is less useful than might be supposed, because we often have too much information, with the result that we can make conflicting direct inferences, and hence they all undergo collective defeat, leaving us without any conclusion to draw about the value of the definite probabilities. This paper presents reason for believing that there is a function — the Y- function — that can be used to combine different indefinite probabilities to yield a single value for the definite probability. Thus we get a kind of “computational” direct inference.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Matthew J. Donald, Probabilities for Observing Mixed Quantum States Given Limited Prior Information.
Joel Pust (2011). Sleeping Beauty and Direct Inference. Analysis 71 (2):290-293.
Ian Evans, Don Fallis, Peter Gross, Terry Horgan, Jenann Ismael, John Pollock, Paul D. Thorn, Jacob N. Caton, Adam Arico, Daniel Sanderman, Orlin Vakerelov, Nathan Ballantyne, Matthew S. Bedke, Brian Fiala & Martin Fricke (2007). An Objectivist Argument for Thirdism. Analysis.
Manfred Jaeger (2005). A Logic for Inductive Probabilistic Reasoning. Synthese 144 (2):181 - 248.
Richard Jeffrey (1996). Unknown Probabilities. Erkenntnis 45 (2-3):327 - 335.
John Pollock (2011). Reasoning Defeasibly About Probabilities. Synthese 181 (2):317 - 352.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #142,473 of 739,369 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,369 )
How can I increase my downloads?