Resolving Peer Disagreements Through Imprecise Probabilities
Resolving Peer Disagreements Through Imprecise Probabilities
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/nous.12143
复制
发表时间：
2018-06-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
Wheeler, Gregory
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Elkin, Lee;Wheeler, Gregory
两个强制性原则，合理范围原则和保留无关证据原则，是任何对同伴分歧的回应都应该遵守的必要条件。合理范围原则认为，解决同行分歧不应超出同行在其争议中表达的观点范围，而不相关证据保留原则（PIE）则认为，解决策略应该能够在同行之间保持对证据不相关性的一致判断。没有标准的贝叶斯解决方案的策略满足PIE原则，但是，我们给出了一个损失厌恶的论点，支持PIE和反对贝叶斯。不精确的概率理论允许一个满足这两个原则，我们引入了一个基于集合的信用判断框架的概念，并解决了一系列微妙的问题，出现在同行的分歧。
Two compelling principles, the Reasonable Range Principle and the Preservation of Irrelevant Evidence Principle, are necessary conditions that any response to peer disagreements ought to abide by. The Reasonable Range Principle maintains that a resolution to a peer disagreement should not fall outside the range of views expressed by the peers in their dispute, whereas the Preservation of Irrelevant Evidence (PIE) Principle maintains that a resolution strategy should be able to preserve unanimous judgments of evidential irrelevance among the peers. No standard Bayesian resolution strategy satisfies the PIE Principle, however, and we give a loss aversion argument in support of PIE and against Bayes. The theory of imprecise probability allows one to satisfy both principles, and we introduce the notion of a set-based credal judgment to frame and address a range of subtle issues that arise in peer disagreements.