Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T15:02:27.871Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Symmetry Arguments in Probability Kinematics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

R.I.G Hughes
Affiliation:
Yale University
Bas C van Fraassen
Affiliation:
Princeton University

Extract

Probability kinematics is the theory of how subjective probabilities change with time, in response to certain constraints (accepted by the subject in response to his experience or incoming information). Transformations — rules for updating one's probabilities — which have been described and to some extent accepted in the literature, include (in increasing order of generality): conditionalization, Jeffrey conditionalization, and INFOMIN (relative information minimizing). The present paper investigates the general problem. By an argument purely based on symmetry considerations it is demonstrated that conditionalization and Jeffrey conditionalization are the unique admissible rules for the cases to which they apply. The general problem is thereby reduced to a sequence of two operations, the second a Jeffrey conditionalization and the first a determination of posterior odds on some partition. In Section 2 we give a new deduction of INFOMIN from a simple postulate; in Section 3 a rival rule (MTP) derived from an analogy to quantum mechanics. The Appendix presents some preliminary comparisons.

Type
Part XXI. Generalizations of Bayesian Methods
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Diaconis, P and Zabell, S.L (1982). “Updating Subjective Probability.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 77: 822-830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeffrey, R (1983). The Logic of Decision. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Teller, Paul (1976). “Conditionalization, Observation, and Change of Preference.” In Foundations of Probability Theory. Statistical Inferencer and Statistical Theories of Science, Volume I. (University of Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science. Volume 6.) Edited by H.L. Harper and C.A. Hooker. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. Pages 205-253.Google Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C (1980). “Rational Belief and Probability Kinematics.” Philosophy of Science 17: 165-187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C (1981). “A Problem for Relative Information Minimizing in Probability Kinematics.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 32: 375-379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C (1986). “A Demonstration of the Jeffrey Conditional ization Rule.” Erkenntnis 24: 17-24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, P.M (1980). “Bayesian Conditional ization and the Pritaciple of Minimum Information. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 31: 131-144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar