可信度与信念:基于距离和效用的方法

IF 1.4 2区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Minkyung Wang, Chisu Kim
{"title":"可信度与信念:基于距离和效用的方法","authors":"Minkyung Wang, Chisu Kim","doi":"10.1017/psa.2024.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper investigates the question of how subjective probability should relate to binary belief.We propose new distance minimization methods, and develop epistemic decision theoretic accounts. Both approaches can be shown to get “close” to the truth: the first one by getting “close” to a given probability, and the second one by getting expectedly “close” to the truth.More specifically, we study distance minimization with a refined notion of Bregman divergence and expected utility maximization with strict proper scores. Our main results reveal that the two ways to get “close” to the truth can coincide.","PeriodicalId":54620,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Credence and Belief: Distance- and Utility-based Approaches\",\"authors\":\"Minkyung Wang, Chisu Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/psa.2024.9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This paper investigates the question of how subjective probability should relate to binary belief.We propose new distance minimization methods, and develop epistemic decision theoretic accounts. Both approaches can be shown to get “close” to the truth: the first one by getting “close” to a given probability, and the second one by getting expectedly “close” to the truth.More specifically, we study distance minimization with a refined notion of Bregman divergence and expected utility maximization with strict proper scores. Our main results reveal that the two ways to get “close” to the truth can coincide.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54620,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy of Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2024.9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2024.9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了主观概率应如何与二元信念相关联的问题。我们提出了新的距离最小化方法,并发展了认识论决策理论的解释。这两种方法都能证明 "接近 "真相:第一种方法是 "接近 "给定概率,第二种方法是预期 "接近 "真相。更具体地说,我们研究了使用布雷格曼发散精炼概念的距离最小化和使用严格适当分数的预期效用最大化。我们的主要结果表明,这两种 "接近 "真相的方法是一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Credence and Belief: Distance- and Utility-based Approaches
This paper investigates the question of how subjective probability should relate to binary belief.We propose new distance minimization methods, and develop epistemic decision theoretic accounts. Both approaches can be shown to get “close” to the truth: the first one by getting “close” to a given probability, and the second one by getting expectedly “close” to the truth.More specifically, we study distance minimization with a refined notion of Bregman divergence and expected utility maximization with strict proper scores. Our main results reveal that the two ways to get “close” to the truth can coincide.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
5.90%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1934, Philosophy of Science, along with its sponsoring society, the Philosophy of Science Association, has been dedicated to the furthering of studies and free discussion from diverse standpoints in the philosophy of science. The journal contains essays, discussion articles, and book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信