Actually in AI the most influential version of Bayesianism is that of Judea Pearl, which is "subjective" though not in the full sense of the term as it means in history. All the other more traditional versions have much less impact.
Pei On 2/4/07, gts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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. 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
