Benja comments on A model of UDT with a concrete prior over logical statements - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (21)
Um, I don't see value in excluding statements that have e.g. a forall-exists-forall-exists sequence of quantifiers at the outer level?
But yeah, there may well be some systematic bias, and I have no particular reason to believe that easier satisfiability of long disjunctive statements could not be the cause of such a bias... unfortunately, my insight isn't good enough to offer anything but guesses. As I said in the post, I'm really not sure whether this is a good choice of prior or not; the main point of having it is to have something concrete to think about, possibly as a stand-in for a better prior over the same set of "worlds".
I just wanted to show it seems possible to do better and that was easier to do considering only a subset of statements.
Ah, ok.