You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Vaniver comments on 'An objective defense of Bayesianism' - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: lukeprog 13 September 2011 10:04PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (5)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Vaniver 13 September 2011 10:27:02PM 1 point [-]

We describe three epistemic dilemmas that an agent might face if she attempts to follow Accuracy, and we show that the only inaccuracy measures that do not give rise to such dilemmas are the quadratic inaccuracy measures.

Huh? I don't have the time to look into this, but are they saying that a quadratic inaccuracy measure is superior to entropy?

Comment author: Matt_Simpson 14 September 2011 06:42:05AM 1 point [-]

Yes, basically they're saying given some reasonable (at least to them) assumptions about what an accuracy measure should look like, the only acceptable measure is quadratic.

They make some arbitrary assumptions about how to represent the space of possible worlds and degrees of belief, and it isn't clear if their result depends on these assumptions (they acknowledge this).