David Poole wrote:
I was trying to understand Judea's example. The only way I could
understand it was to think of what protocol the principal
of the school was following
The example is independent of any specific protocol,
It was devised to illustrate the semantical difference
between probabilities and belief functions, and to show
that sometimes belief functions is what we need to
compute, not probabilities.
Take any protocol (e.g., given a choice, the principal
will assign me class R by flipping a coin, or by checking if
Joe is assigned class S, or whatever)
the fact remains that P(R) stands for the probability
that R occurs (i.e., I will be assign to teach R)
and Bel(R) stands for the probability that R is inevitable
(the principal had no choice but to assign R to me).
The principal doesn't have the
choice to only assign Judea the class R with chance Bel(R).
Sure he has. If he is committed to bail me out of R
whenever another class assignment is feasible, then the probability that
R occurs is equal to the probability that R is inevitable,
or P(R) = Bel(R)
I don't think Judea should shoot him.
I will seriously reconsider. But only if he
does not try to convince me again that
belief functions represent "beliefs".
(No wonder everyone is complaining about
violence on the Internet ;^)
No wonder,
==========Judea
