PDF Archive search engine
Last database update: 17 May at 11:24 - Around 76000 files indexed.
Fool Me Once: Can Indifference Vindicate Induction? Roger White (2015) sketches an ingenious new solution to the problem of induction. It argues on a priori grounds that the world is more likely to be inductionfriendly than inductionunfriendly. The argument relies primarily on the principle of indifference, and, somewhat surprisingly, assumes little else. If inductive methods could be vindicated in anything like this way, it would be quite a groundbreaking result. But there are grounds for pessimism about the envisaged approach. This paper shows that in the crucial test cases White concentrates on, the principle of indifference actually renders induction no more accurate than random guessing. It then diagnoses why the indifferencebased argument seems so intuitively compelling, despite being ultimately unsound. 1 An IndifferenceBased Strategy White begins by imagining that we are “apprentice demons” tasked with devising an inductionunfriendly world – a world where inductive methods tend to be unreliable. To simplify, we imagine that there is a single binary variable that we control (such as whether the sun rises over a series of consecutive days). So, in essence, the task is to construct a binary sequence such that – if the sequence were revealed one bit at a time – an inductive reasoner would fare poorly at predicting its future bits. This task, it turns out, is surprisingly difficult. To see this, it will be instructive to consider several possible strategies for constructing a sequence that would frustrate an ideal inductive predictor. Immediately, it is clear that we should avoid uniformly patterned sequences, such as: 00000000000000000000000000000000 or 01010101010101010101010101010101. 1 Sequences like these are quite kind to induction. Our inductive reasoner would quickly latch onto the obvious patterns these sequences exhibit. A more promising approach, it might seem, is to build an apparently patternless sequence: 00101010011111000011100010010100 But, importantly, while induction will not be particularly reliable at predicting the terms of this sequence, it will not be particularly unreliable here either. Induction would simply be silent about what a sequence like this contains. As White puts it, “ In order for... induction to be applied, our data must contain a salient regularity of a reasonable length” (p. 285). When no pattern whatsoever can be discerned, presumably, induction is silent. (We will assume that the inductive predictor is permitted to suspend judgment whenever she wishes.) The original aim was not to produce an inductionneutral sequence, but to produce a sequence that elicits errors from induction. So an entirely patternless sequence will not suffice. Instead, the inductionunfriendly sequence will have to be more devious, building up seeming patterns and then violating them. As a first pass, we can try this: 00000000000000000000000000000001 Of course, this precise sequence is relatively friendly to induction. While our inductive predictor will undoubtedly botch her prediction of the final bit, it is clear that she will be able to amass a long string of successes prior to that point. So, on balance, the above sequence is quite kind to induction – though not maximally so. In order to render induction unreliable, we will need to elicit more errors than correct predictions. We might try to achieve this as follows: 00001111000011110000111100001111 2 The idea here is to offer up just enough of a pattern to warrant an inductive prediction, before pulling the rug out – and then to repeat the same trick again and again. Of course, this precise sequence would not necessarily be the way to render induction unreliable: For, even if we did manage to elicit an error or two from our inductive predictor early on, it seems clear that she would eventually catch on to the exceptionless higherorder pattern governing the behavior of the sequence. The upshot of these observations is not that constructing an inductionunfriendly sequence is impossible. As White points out, constructing such a sequence should be possible, given any complete description of how exactly induction works (p. 287). Nonetheless, even if there are a few special sequences that can frustrate induction, it seems clear that such sequences are fairly few and far between. In contrast, it is obviously very easy to corroborate induction (i.e. to construct a sequence rendering it thoroughly reliable). So induction is relatively unfrustrateable. And it is worth noting that this property is fairly specific to induction. For example, consider an inferential method based on the gambler’s fallacy, which advises one to predict whichever outcome has occurred less often, overall. It would be quite easy to frustrate this method thoroughly (e.g. 00000000…). So far, we have identified a highly suggestive feature of induction. To put things roughly, it can seem that: * Over a large number of sequences, induction is thoroughly reliable. * Over a large number of sequences, induction is silent (and hence, neither reliable nor unreliable). * Over a very small number of sequences (i.e. those specifically designed to thwart induction), induction is unreliable (though, even in these cases, induction is still silent much of the time). 3 Viewed from this angle, it can seem reasonable to conclude that there are a priori grounds for confidence that an arbitrary sequence is not inductionunfriendly. After all, there seem to be far more inductionfriendly sequences than inductionunfriendly ones. If we assign equal probability to every possible sequence, then the probability that an arbitrary sequence will be inductionfriendly is going to be significantly higher than the probability that it will be inductionunfriendly. So a simple appeal to the principle of indifference seems to generate the happy verdict that induction can be expected to be more reliable than not, at least in the case of binary sequences. Moreover, as White points out, the general strategy is not limited to binary sequences. If we can show a priori that induction over a binary sequence is unlikely to be inductionunfriendly, then it’s plausible that a similar kind of argument can be used to show that we are justified in assuming that an arbitrary world is not inductionunfriendly. If true, this would serve to fully vindicate induction. 2 Given Indifference, Induction Is not Reliable However, there are grounds for pessimism about whether the strategy is successful even in the simple case of binary sequences. Suppose that, as a special promotion, a casino decided to offer Fair Roulette. The game involves betting $1 on a particular color – black or red – and then spinning a wheel, which is entirely half red and half black. If wrong, you lose your dollar; if right, you get your dollar back and gain another. If it were really true that induction can be expected to be more reliable than not over binary sequences, it would seem to follow that induction can serve as a winning strategy, over the long term, in Fair Roulette. After all, multiple spins of the wheel produce a binary sequence of reds and blacks. And all possible sequences are 4 equally probable. Of course, induction cannot be used to win at Fair Roulette – past occurrences of red, for example, are not evidence that the next spin is more likely to be red. This suggests that something is amiss. Indeed, it turns out that no inferential method – whether inductive or otherwise – can possibly be expected to be reliable at predicting unseen bits of a binary sequence, if the principle of indifference is assumed. This can be shown as follows. Let S be an unknown binary sequence of length n. S is to be revealed one bit at a time, starting with the first. S: ? ? ? ? ? ? … ? :S n bits Let f be an arbitrary predictive function that takes as input any initial subsequence of S and outputs a prediction for the next bit: ‘0’, ‘1’, or ‘suspend judgment’. A predictive function’s accuracy is measured as follows: +1 for each correct prediction; 1 for each incorrect prediction; 0 each time ‘suspend judgment’ occurs. (So the maximum accuracy of a function is n; the minimum score is –n.) Given a probability distribution over all possible sequences, the expected accuracy of a predictive function is the average of its possible scores weighted by their respective probabilities. Claim: If we assume indifference (i.e. if we assign equal probability to every possible sequence), then – no matter what S is – each of f’s predictions will be expected to contribute 0 to f’s accuracy. And, as a consequence of this, f has 0 expected accuracy more generally. Proof: For some initial subsequences, f will output ‘suspend judgment’. The contribution of such predictions will inevitably be 0. So we need consider only those cases where f makes a firm prediction (i.e. ‘0’ or ‘1’; not ‘suspend judgment’). Let K be a klength initial subsequence for which f makes a firm prediction about the bit in 5
Selected inductees are announced, inducted and awarded at NFMusicHOF’s Induction Gala to be held annually. Nomination Criteria The NFMusicHOF encourages nominations/applications from all genres of music, as well as, businesses and individuals that have had a significant impact on both the local music scene and the music industry in general.
000.3 - Mathematical Induction c 2010 Treasure Trove of Mathematics Mathematical induction is a method of mathematical proof typically used to establish that a given statement is true of all natural numbers (non-negative integers).1 It is done by proving that the first statement in the infinite sequence of statements is true, and then proving that if any one statement in the infinite sequence of statements is true, then so is the next one.
10.11591/eei.v5i1.xxxx 25 New Model Reference Adaptive System Speed Observer for Field-Oriented Control Induction Motor Drives Using Neural Networks 1 Hossein Rahimi Khoei*1, Mahdi Zolfaghari2 Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Technical and Professional University Shahrekord, Shahrekord, Iran 2 Tehran polytechnic, Tehran, Iran *Corresponding author, e-mail:
Modeling, Verification and Control of Asynchronous Motor (Induction Motor) Vahab Rostampour Ali Javadizadeh Umair javad Nihat Ozlü Department of Automation and Control Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Italy Laboratory supervisor:
Our tools are made with high-quality material including Forged Chrome Vanadium Steel with induction hardened cutting edges and teeth.
Based on the threshold for cytokine stimulation and percentage of cells that display pSTAT5 induction, CMML appears to preferentially utilize GM-CSF for survival and/or expansion.
Niagara Falls Music Hall Of Fame 6676 Rohr Street * Niagara Falls, NY 14304 * (716) 731-5584 To be considered for induction in the Class of 2019 Niagara Falls Music Hall of Fame, complete this form in its entirety and return it along with supporting materials to the address above NO LATER THAN JUNE 30, 2019.
Our Auto Bag Drop safety and security features ensure that the bag measurement process and induction to the baggage handling system is protected against intrusion or tampering, while also ensure each passenger has the allocated luggage allowance specific to the boarding pass presented.
30378 (SPAIN) ELECTRICAL GENERATOR FIGUERA - BLASBERG Since 1833, when, in France, Pixii built the first magneto-electric machine, to the present time, all machines magneto and dynamo-electric that inventors’ knowledge has materialized in the industry are based on the law of induction that says "all magnet which approaches or moves away from a close circuit, produces in it induced currents"
Illegal Substances Employees' Receiving Gifts Uniform/ Dress Code Harassment and Bullying Absence Reporting Absence Management Employee Induction Employee Appraisal, Training and Development Employee Supervision Maternity Leave Paternity Leave Adoption leave Parental Leave Special Leave Flexible Working Discipline and Dismissal Procedure Grievances PAGE 5 7 13 16 18 20 22 24 26 29 31 34 36 37 38 41 45 48 51 53 56 58 63 66 71 74 78 80 87 3|P ag e Reviewed 16.03.2017 Mayflower Care Home FORMS AND RECORDS HRM-FR-01 Application For Employment 01-03/17 HRM-FR-01a Equal Opportunities Monitoring Form 01-03/17 HRM-FR-01b Equal Opportunities Return Form 01-03/17 HRM-FR-02a Short Listed Rejection Letter 01-03/17 HRM-FR-02b Invitation to Interview Letter 01-03/17 HRM-FR-02c Employment Offer Letter 01-03/17 HRM-FR-02d Employment Rejection letter 01-03/17 HRM-FR-02e HRM-FR-02f Health Questionnaire Interview Record Form 01-03/17 HRM-FR-02g New Staff Member Form 01 03/12 HRM-FR-02h Payroll New Starter Form 01 03/12 HRM-FR-02i Reference Request Letter 01 03/12 HRM-FR-02j Reference Form 01 03/12 HRM-FR-02k Exit Interview 01 03/12 HRM-FR-03a Volunteer Arrangement 01 03/12 HRM-FR-03b Volunteer Service Record HRM-FR-04a HRM-FR-07a HRM-FR-09a HRM-FR-09b HRM-FR-10a HRM-FR-10b HRM-FR-10c HRM-FR-10d HRM-FR-10e HRM-FR-10f HRM-FR-11a HRM-FR-12a HRM-FR-13a HRM-FR-13b HRM-FR-13c HRM-FR-19a HRM-FR-19b HRM-FR-20a HRM-FR-20b HRM-FR-20c HRM-FR-20d HRM-FR-20e HRM-FR-20f HRM-FR-21a HRM-FR-21b HRM-FR-21c HRM-FR-21d HRM-FR-22a HRM-FR-22b HRM-FR-22c HRM-FR-22d HRM-FR-22e HRM-FR-24a HRM-FR-24b HRM-FR-24c HRM-FR-24d Form Young Person Risk Assessment SSSC Registration Register Contract of Employment Amendment to Contract Form Invitation to Probationary Review Meeting Probationary Review Form Completion of Probation Letter Extension of Probation Letter Termination of Employment during Probationary Period Letter Termination of Employment on completion of Probation Letter Personnel File Front Sheet Annual Leave Request Form Night Workers Medical Report Form Night Workers Annual Health Review Form Working Hours Agreement Form Employee Absence Report Form Employee Absence Record Form Invitation to Absence Interview Letter Employee Consent for Medical Report Letter Employee Medical Consent Form Request to General Practitioner for Medical Record Absence Warning Letter Absence - Termination of Employment Letter Employee Induction Form Catering Staff Induction Form Maintenance Staff Induction Form Domestic Staff Induction Form Staff Performance Appraisal Form Mandatory Training Course Agreement Funding Request for Training Training Agreement Personnel Training Record Maternity Leave Application Maternity Leave Response Letter Keep In Touch Days Form ( KIT Form) Maternity Leave Response - Non Payment Letter ISSUE 01-03/17 01 03/12 "
Congrats to the graduating brothers Kris Brew (Chi) - The Reading Fightin’ Phils social Ashten Brinker (Phi) Volume 9, December 2014 issue - Meeting Kait Amodei, my amazing little Raisa Colon (Chi) -The brother retreat Patrick Dietrich (Phi) - Inducting his two littles, the brother retreats, and the 2014 National Convention Samantha Jones (Phi) - The brother retreats and getting closer to the brothers Victoria Lindenmuth (Phi) - The Elf movie social in which I got to make some really good waffles Montrez Lewis (Phi) - The induction ceremonies, it’s rewarding to see people inducted from various backgrounds By Patrick Dietrich K Your 2015 eBoard utztown University’s chapter of Phi Sigma Pi National Honor Fraternity, Epsilon Alpha, was recognized for their fellowship at the National Convention.