= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
abramdemski comments on Reflection in Probabilistic Logic - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (171)
The negated statements become 'or', so we get x <= P(A) or P(A) <= y, right?
To me, the strangest thing about this is the >0 condition... if the probability of this type of statement is above 0, it is true!
I agree that the derivation of (4) from (3) in the paper is unclear. The negation of a<b<c is not a>=b>=c.
Ah, so there are already revisions... (I didn't have a (4) in the version I read).