Abram, Can your approach gives the Confidence measurement a probabilistic interpretation? It is what really differs NARS from the other approaches.
Pei On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 11:22 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> This example also shows why NARS and PLN are similar on deduction, but >>> very different in abduction and induction. >> >> Yes. One of my biggest practical complaints with NARS is that the induction >> and abduction truth value formulas don't make that much sense to me. > > Interesting in the context of these statements that my current > "justification" for NARS probabilistically justifies induction and > abduction but isn't as clear concerning deduction. (I'm working on > it...) > > --Abram Demski > > > ------------------------------------------- > agi > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
