583 research outputs found

    Resolving the Raven Paradox: Simple Random Sampling, Stratified Random Sampling, and Inference to the Best Explanation

    Get PDF
    Simple random sampling resolutions of the raven paradox relevantly diverge from scientific practice. We develop a stratified random sampling model, yielding a better fit and apparently rehabilitating simple random sampling as a legitimate idealization. However, neither accommodates a second concern, the objection from potential bias. We develop a third model that crucially invokes causal considerations, yielding a novel resolution that handles both concerns. This approach resembles Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) and relates the generalization’s confirmation to confirmation of an associated law. We give it an objective Bayesian formalization and discuss the compatibility of Bayesianism and IBE

    Barking Up the Right Tree: Are Small Groups Rational Agents?

    Get PDF
    Both mainstream economics and its critics have focused on models of individual rational agents even though most important decisions are made by small groups. Little systematic work has been done to study the behavior of small groups as decision-making agents in markets and other strategic games. This may limit the relevance of both economics and its critics to the objective of developing an understanding of how most important decisions are made. In order to gain some insight into this issue, this paper compares group and individual economic behavior. The objective of the research is to learn whether there are systematic differences between decisions made by groups and individual agents in market environments characterized by risky outcomes. A quantitative measure of deviation from minimallyrational decisions is used to compare group and individual behavior in common value auctions.

    Statistical Inference and the Plethora of Probability Paradigms: A Principled Pluralism

    Get PDF
    The major competing statistical paradigms share a common remarkable but unremarked thread: in many of their inferential applications, different probability interpretations are combined. How this plays out in different theories of inference depends on the type of question asked. We distinguish four question types: confirmation, evidence, decision, and prediction. We show that Bayesian confirmation theory mixes what are intuitively “subjective” and “objective” interpretations of probability, whereas the likelihood-based account of evidence melds three conceptions of what constitutes an “objective” probability

    The causal foundations of applied probability and statistics

    Full text link
    Statistical science (as opposed to mathematical statistics) involves far more than probability theory, for it requires realistic causal models of data generators - even for purely descriptive goals. Statistical decision theory requires more causality: Rational decisions are actions taken to minimize costs while maximizing benefits, and thus require explication of causes of loss and gain. Competent statistical practice thus integrates logic, context, and probability into scientific inference and decision using narratives filled with causality. This reality was seen and accounted for intuitively by the founders of modern statistics, but was not well recognized in the ensuing statistical theory (which focused instead on the causally inert properties of probability measures). Nonetheless, both statistical foundations and basic statistics can and should be taught using formal causal models. The causal view of statistical science fits within a broader information-processing framework which illuminates and unifies frequentist, Bayesian, and related probability-based foundations of statistics. Causality theory can thus be seen as a key component connecting computation to contextual information, not extra-statistical but instead essential for sound statistical training and applications.Comment: 22 pages; in press for Dechter, R., Halpern, J., and Geffner, H., eds. Probabilistic and Causal Inference: The Works of Judea Pearl. ACM book

    Distinguishing PTSD, Complex PTSD, and Borderline Personality Disorder: A latent class analysis

    Get PDF
    Background: There has been debate regarding whether Complex Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (Complex PTSD) is distinct from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) when the latter is comorbid with PTSD. Objective: To determine whether the patterns of symptoms endorsed by women seeking treatment for childhood abuse form classes that are consistent with diagnostic criteria for PTSD, Complex PTSD, and BPD. Method: A latent class analysis (LCA) was conducted on an archival dataset of 280 women with histories of childhood abuse assessed for enrollment in a clinical trial for PTSD. Results: The LCA revealed four distinct classes of individuals: a Low Symptom class characterized by low endorsements on all symptoms; a PTSD class characterized by elevated symptoms of PTSD but low endorsement of symptoms that define the Complex PTSD and BPD diagnoses; a Complex PTSD class characterized by elevated symptoms of PTSD and self-organization symptoms that defined the Complex PTSD diagnosis but low on the symptoms of BPD; and a BPD class characterized by symptoms of BPD. Four BPD symptoms were found to greatly increase the odds of being in the BPD compared to the Complex PTSD class: frantic efforts to avoid abandonment, unstable sense of self, unstable and intense interpersonal relationships, and impulsiveness. Conclusions: Findings supported the construct validity of Complex PTSD as distinguishable from BPD. Key symptoms that distinguished between the disorders were identified, which may aid in differential diagnosis and treatment planning

    The Inhuman Overhang: On Differential Heterogenesis and Multi-Scalar Modeling

    Get PDF
    As a philosophical paradigm, differential heterogenesis offers us a novel descriptive vantage with which to inscribe Deleuze’s virtuality within the terrain of “differential becoming,” conjugating “pure saliences” so as to parse economies, microhistories, insurgencies, and epistemological evolutionary processes that can be conceived of independently from their representational form. Unlike Gestalt theory’s oppositional constructions, the advantage of this aperture is that it posits a dynamic context to both media and its analysis, rendering them functionally tractable and set in relation to other objects, rather than as sedentary identities. Surveying the genealogy of differential heterogenesis with particular interest in the legacy of Lautman’s dialectic, I make the case for a reading of the Deleuzean virtual that departs from an event-oriented approach, galvanizing Sarti and Citti’s dynamic a priori vis-à-vis Deleuze’s philosophy of difference. Specifically, I posit differential heterogenesis as frame with which to examine our contemporaneous epistemic shift as it relates to multi-scalar computational modeling while paying particular attention to neuro-inferential modes of inductive learning and homologous cognitive architecture. Carving a bricolage between Mark Wilson’s work on the “greediness of scales” and Deleuze’s “scales of reality”, this project threads between static ecologies and active externalism vis-à-vis endocentric frames of reference and syntactical scaffolding
    • …
    corecore