From Gigacom, news that Lyric Semiconductor, an MIT spinoff, is developing a new approach to data processing, which they call “probability processing”:

For over 60 years, computers have been based on digital computing principles. Data is represented as bits (1s and 0s). Boolean logic gates perform operations on these bits. Lyric has invented a new kind of logic gate circuit that uses transistors as dimmer switches instead of as on/off switches. These circuits can accept inputs and calculate outputs that are between 0 and 1, directly representing probabilities – levels of certainty. A digital processor steps through these operations serially in order to perform a function. In order to improve efficiency even further, Lyric’s processors are designed to perform many probability computations in parallel. (Lyric Press Materials)

Means

An n-Category Café Blog Post on Means by Tom Leinster.

Some links:
The Central Limit Theorem, Edges of Graphs, and Graph Layout, (Leland Wilkinson).

The Monty Hall Problem, (The New York Times).

Take this question out back…, (Language Log).

Finally, the great Lenny Pickett, (circa 1973). He is the one in the bow tie.

Postdoctoral position at ENS Cachan – LSV and CEA LIST – MeASI
—————————
Credibilistic and Prevision-Theoretic Semantics and
Analysis of Numerical Programs

—————————

For details and deadlines, contact:
—————————
Jean Goubault-Larrecq
goubault@lsv.ens-cachan.fr
Eric Goubault
eric.goubault@cea.fr
Olivier Bouissou
olivier.bouissou@cea.fr

Project description:

This postdoctoral position is part of the ANR Blanc “Confidence, Proof and Probabilities” project. This project aims at studying the joint use of probabilistic and deterministic semantics and analysis methods in order to improve the applicability and precision of static analysis methods on numerical programs. The project includes theoretical computer scientists, specialists of abstract interpretation based static analysis, applied mathematicians and control theoreticians as well as industrial partners. The project will contain the following steps:

* construction of good approximations of the semantics for non-deterministic and probabilistic behaviours.
* abstraction of these semantics models for the tractable static analysis of complex programs and test case generation.
* characterisation of the imprecision error due to the use of floating point numbers by the program.
Continue Reading »

Hannes Leitgeb has recently posted the following information for 2 new openings for Assistant Professorships at LMU Munich. The first is for an Assistant Professorship in Logic and Philosophy of Language, and the second is for an Assistant Professorship in Mathematical Philosophy.

Continue Reading »

An announcement from Jonathan Phillips: The Experiment Month initiative is a program designed to help philosophers conduct experimental studies. If you are interested in running a study, you can send your study proposal to the Experiment Month staff. Then, if your proposal is selected for inclusion, we will conduct the study online, send you the results and help out with any statistical analysis you may need. All proposals are due Sept. 1. For further information, see the Experiment Month website.

An obituary from the New York Times, and a notice from the OU Math Club in Norman.

Here’s a plug for my new book!

In defence of objective Bayesianism

How strongly should you believe the various propositions that you can express?

That is the key question facing Bayesian epistemology. Subjective Bayesians hold that it is largely (though not entirely) up to the agent as to which degrees of belief to adopt. Objective Bayesians, on the other hand, maintain that appropriate degrees of belief are largely (though not entirely) determined by the agent’s evidence. This book states and defends a version of objective Bayesian epistemology. According to this version, objective Bayesianism is characterized by three norms:

  • Probability – degrees of belief should be probabilities
  • Calibration – they should be calibrated with evidence
  • Equivocation – they should otherwise equivocate between basic outcomes

Objective Bayesianism has been challenged on a number of different fronts. For example, some claim it is poorly motivated, or fails to handle qualitative evidence, or yields counter-intuitive degrees of belief after updating, or suffers from a failure to learn from experience. It has also been accused of being computationally intractable, susceptible to paradox, language dependent, and of not being objective enough.

Especially suitable for graduates or researchers in philosophy of science, foundations of statistics and artificial intelligence, the book argues that these criticisms can be met and that objective Bayesianism is a promising theory with an exciting agenda for further research.

Available now through all good bookshops, or direct from Oxford University
Press at:
http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199228003.do

I give a quick sketch of the justification of objective Bayesianism that I favour in a book review, available here or here.

Older Posts »