The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Irrelevance: strengthening the Bayesian requirements

Irrelevance: strengthening the Bayesian requirements
Irrelevance: strengthening the Bayesian requirements
Bayesians standardly identify irrelevance with probabilistic irrelevance. However, there are cases where e is probabilistically irrelevant to h but intuitively e is relevant to h. For instance, ‘Die A came up 1 and die B came up 1, 3, 5 or 6’ is probabilistically irrelevant to ‘Die A came up odd and die B came up even’, yet, intuitively, it is not, irrelevant to that claim, in the sense that ‘Sydney has a harbour Bridge’ is irrelevant to it. In the context of decision making this notion of irrelevance combined with such rules as ‘Do not expend resources on irrelevant evidence’ leads to bad results. A stronger notion of irrelevance fitting our intuitions and the contexts of decision making is proposed: e is irrelevant to h if and only if every part of e is probabilistically irrelevant to every part of h. However, we need to take care in determining what counts as part of a statement.
irrelevance, bayesians, keynes, carnap, gemes
0039-7857
161-166
Gemes, Ken
f087c5ea-9397-4dc3-96a0-a4889cfb840e
Gemes, Ken
f087c5ea-9397-4dc3-96a0-a4889cfb840e

Gemes, Ken (2007) Irrelevance: strengthening the Bayesian requirements. Synthese, 157 (2), 161-166. (doi:10.1007/s11229-006-0009-x).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Bayesians standardly identify irrelevance with probabilistic irrelevance. However, there are cases where e is probabilistically irrelevant to h but intuitively e is relevant to h. For instance, ‘Die A came up 1 and die B came up 1, 3, 5 or 6’ is probabilistically irrelevant to ‘Die A came up odd and die B came up even’, yet, intuitively, it is not, irrelevant to that claim, in the sense that ‘Sydney has a harbour Bridge’ is irrelevant to it. In the context of decision making this notion of irrelevance combined with such rules as ‘Do not expend resources on irrelevant evidence’ leads to bad results. A stronger notion of irrelevance fitting our intuitions and the contexts of decision making is proposed: e is irrelevant to h if and only if every part of e is probabilistically irrelevant to every part of h. However, we need to take care in determining what counts as part of a statement.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 5 July 2007
Keywords: irrelevance, bayesians, keynes, carnap, gemes

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 48427
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/48427
ISSN: 0039-7857
PURE UUID: db8e1eed-8759-4a17-835f-85e444f6e00b

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 21 Sep 2007
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 09:46

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Ken Gemes

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×