From: Scott Yokim (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Aug 04 2006 - 12:33:19 MDT
For the first question, you will want to read the first four chapters of Jaynes's Logic of Science book (see http://www.singinst.org/action/readinglist.html).
For the second, you'll need to ask Eliezer for a recommended source. I think Baum's book mentions VC in passing ...
Philip Goetz <email@example.com> wrote: On 8/1/06, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> Scott Yokim wrote:
> > Maybe each new hypothesis that scientists generate is initially given an
> > evidence of something like -40 dB? And the RPOP should do the same? I
> > suppose the initial value has evolved over time, and could be rising?
> 2) The RPOP should not do the same. You can't use ad-hoc methods in an
> SI, not if you want to live. There are principled methods for dealing
> with this problem such as Kolmogorov complexity and Vapnik-Chervonenkis
> dimension; neither of these quite suits my purposes, but both are a vast
> improvement over a human programmer sitting down, thinking a bit, and
> then inputting a parameter of -40 dB.
Can you -
a) Explain what you mean by assigning a credence of -40dB to something.
b) Explain how Komogorov complexity and Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension
relate to this problem.
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 24 2013 - 04:01:05 MDT