The epistemic structure of de Finetti s betting problem



Similar documents
The epistemic structure of de Finetti s betting problem


Imprecise probabilities, bets and functional analytic methods in Łukasiewicz logic.

Non-Archimedean Probability and Conditional Probability; ManyVal2013 Prague F.Montagna, University of Siena

Interpretations of Probability

Research Note. Bi-intuitionistic Boolean Bunched Logic

Bi-approximation Semantics for Substructural Logic at Work

Mathematical Induction

Probability, Fuzzy Logic and bets: foundational issues and some mathematics.

Goal of the Talk Theorem The class of languages recognisable by T -coalgebra automata is closed under taking complements.

This asserts two sets are equal iff they have the same elements, that is, a set is determined by its elements.

A New Interpretation of Information Rate


Degrees of Truth: the formal logic of classical and quantum probabilities as well as fuzzy sets.

arxiv:math/ v1 [math.pr] 18 Dec 2004

Many-valued Intuitionistic Implication and Inference Closure in a Bilattice-based Logic

Techniques algébriques en calcul quantique

The Ergodic Theorem and randomness

Remarks on Non-Fregean Logic

Logic in general. Inference rules and theorem proving


Chapter 7: Proportional Play and the Kelly Betting System

Additional questions for chapter 4

Iterated Dynamic Belief Revision. Sonja Smets, University of Groningen. website:

The effect of exchange rates on (Statistical) decisions. Teddy Seidenfeld Mark J. Schervish Joseph B. (Jay) Kadane Carnegie Mellon University

Franco Montagna AN ALGEBRAIC TREATMENT OF IMPRECISE PROBABILITIES

Correspondence analysis for strong three-valued logic

Bayesian logistic betting strategy against probability forecasting. Akimichi Takemura, Univ. Tokyo. November 12, 2012

On strong fairness in UNITY

Some Essential Statistics The Lure of Statistics

DEFAULTS IN UPDATE SEMANTICS

FIRST ORDER THEORY OF THE s-degrees AND ARITHMETIC

Lecture 8 The Subjective Theory of Betting on Theories

CHAPTER 7 GENERAL PROOF SYSTEMS

WORKED EXAMPLES 1 TOTAL PROBABILITY AND BAYES THEOREM

Stochastic Inventory Control

APPLICATION SCHEMES OF POSSIBILITY THEORY-BASED DEFAULTS

Prediction Markets. 1 Introduction. 1.1 What is a Prediction Market? Algorithms Seminar

Follow links for Class Use and other Permissions. For more information send to:

Lambda Calculus between Algebra and Topology. Antonino Salibra

Using game-theoretic probability for probability judgment. Glenn Shafer

6.042/18.062J Mathematics for Computer Science December 12, 2006 Tom Leighton and Ronitt Rubinfeld. Random Walks

Non-deterministic Semantics and the Undecidability of Boolean BI

Decidability and Definability in the Σ 0 2-Enumeration Degrees

Maximum Likelihood Estimation

A Hennessy-Milner Property for Many-Valued Modal Logics

GENTLY KILLING S SPACES TODD EISWORTH, PETER NYIKOS, AND SAHARON SHELAH

Logics preserving degrees of truth from varieties of residuated lattices

2. Information Economics

ON THE DEGREE OF MAXIMALITY OF DEFINITIONALLY COMPLETE LOGICS

Classical BI. (A Logic for Reasoning about Dualising Resources) James Brotherston Cristiano Calcagno

Fixed-Point Logics and Computation

University of Maryland Fraternity & Sorority Life Spring 2015 Academic Report

Monitoring Metric First-order Temporal Properties

Solutions: Problems for Chapter 3. Solutions: Problems for Chapter 3

A Framework for the Semantics of Behavioral Contracts

MATH 4552 Cubic equations and Cardano s formulae

Betting on the Outcomes of Measurements: A Bayesian Theory of Quantum Probability

Aegis A Novel Cyber-Insurance Model

LOOKING FOR A GOOD TIME TO BET

Invertible elements in associates and semigroups. 1

The Recovery of a Schema Mapping: Bringing Exchanged Data Back

Modern Algebra Lecture Notes: Rings and fields set 4 (Revision 2)

Recall that two vectors in are perpendicular or orthogonal provided that their dot

Quantum Algorithms. Peter Høyer

Foundational Proof Certificates

General Philosophy. Dr Peter Millican, Hertford College. Lecture 3: Induction

Lectures notes on orthogonal matrices (with exercises) Linear Algebra II - Spring 2004 by D. Klain

ON ROUGH (m, n) BI-Γ-HYPERIDEALS IN Γ-SEMIHYPERGROUPS

Introduction to. Hypothesis Testing CHAPTER LEARNING OBJECTIVES. 1 Identify the four steps of hypothesis testing.

From Classical to Intuitionistic Probability

Inference of Probability Distributions for Trust and Security applications

6.2 Permutations continued

root node level: internal node edge leaf node Data Structures & Algorithms McQuain

Chapter 7. Sealed-bid Auctions

Lights and Darks of the Star-Free Star

Stochastic Models for Inventory Management at Service Facilities

Algebraic and Transcendental Numbers

Total Degrees and Nonsplitting Properties of Σ 0 2 Enumeration Degrees

HYPOTHESIS TESTING: POWER OF THE TEST

Equations, Inequalities & Partial Fractions

Predicate Logic Review

Two approaches to the integration of heterogeneous data warehouses

Model-Based Reliability and Diagnostic: A Common Framework for Reliability and Diagnostics

Supply Chain Coordination with Financial Constraints and Bankruptcy Costs

Which Semantics for Neighbourhood Semantics?

PROCESS AND TRUTH-TABLE CHARACTERISATIONS OF RANDOMNESS

On the Unique Games Conjecture

Equality and dependent type theory. Oberwolfach, March 2 (with some later corrections)

Automated Theorem Proving - summary of lecture 1

Galois Theory III Splitting fields.

Local-Effect Games. Kevin Leyton-Brown and Moshe Tennenholtz. Abstract. 1 Introduction. 2 Local-Effect Games

Omega Automata: Minimization and Learning 1

Undergraduate Notes in Mathematics. Arkansas Tech University Department of Mathematics

Lecture 3: Growth with Overlapping Generations (Acemoglu 2009, Chapter 9, adapted from Zilibotti)

Math/Stats 425 Introduction to Probability. 1. Uncertainty and the axioms of probability

Handout #1: Mathematical Reasoning

Review. Bayesianism and Reliability. Today s Class

a 1 x + a 0 =0. (3) ax 2 + bx + c =0. (4)

Transcription:

The epistemic structure of de Finetti s betting problem Tommaso Flaminio 1 Hykel Hosni 2 1 IIIA - CSIC Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona (Spain) tommaso@iiia.csic.es www.iiia.csic.es/ tommaso 2 SNS Scuola Normale Superiore (Italy) hykel.hosni@sns.it homepage.sns.it/hosni CILC 12 Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 1 / 8

Motivation De Finetti s foundation of probability Let E 1,..., E n be of events of interest. De Finetti s betting problem is the choice that an idealized agent called bookmaker must make when publishing a book, i.e. when making the assignment B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} such that each E i is given value β i [0, 1]. Once a book has been published, a gambler can place bets on event E i by paying α i β i to the bookmaker. In return for this payment, the gambler will receive α i, if E i occurs and nothing if E i does not occur. The book B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} is coherent (or is not a Dutch Book) iff there is no betting strategy for gambler, ensuring a sure win! iff the assignment B extends to a probability measure on the algebra of formulas. Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 2 / 8

Motivation De Finetti s foundation of probability Let E 1,..., E n be of events of interest. De Finetti s betting problem is the choice that an idealized agent called bookmaker must make when publishing a book, i.e. when making the assignment B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} such that each E i is given value β i [0, 1]. Once a book has been published, a gambler can place bets on event E i by paying α i β i to the bookmaker. In return for this payment, the gambler will receive α i, if E i occurs and nothing if E i does not occur. The book B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} is coherent (or is not a Dutch Book) iff there is no betting strategy for gambler, ensuring a sure win! iff the assignment B extends to a probability measure on the algebra of formulas. Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 2 / 8

Motivation De Finetti s foundation of probability Let E 1,..., E n be of events of interest. De Finetti s betting problem is the choice that an idealized agent called bookmaker must make when publishing a book, i.e. when making the assignment B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} such that each E i is given value β i [0, 1]. Once a book has been published, a gambler can place bets on event E i by paying α i β i to the bookmaker. In return for this payment, the gambler will receive α i, if E i occurs and nothing if E i does not occur. The book B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} is coherent (or is not a Dutch Book) iff there is no betting strategy for gambler, ensuring a sure win! iff the assignment B extends to a probability measure on the algebra of formulas. Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 2 / 8

Motivation De Finetti s foundation of probability Let E 1,..., E n be of events of interest. De Finetti s betting problem is the choice that an idealized agent called bookmaker must make when publishing a book, i.e. when making the assignment B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} such that each E i is given value β i [0, 1]. Once a book has been published, a gambler can place bets on event E i by paying α i β i to the bookmaker. In return for this payment, the gambler will receive α i, if E i occurs and nothing if E i does not occur. The book B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} is coherent (or is not a Dutch Book) iff there is no betting strategy for gambler, ensuring a sure win! iff the assignment B extends to a probability measure on the algebra of formulas. Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 2 / 8

Motivation De Finetti s foundation of probability Let E 1,..., E n be of events of interest. De Finetti s betting problem is the choice that an idealized agent called bookmaker must make when publishing a book, i.e. when making the assignment B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} such that each E i is given value β i [0, 1]. Once a book has been published, a gambler can place bets on event E i by paying α i β i to the bookmaker. In return for this payment, the gambler will receive α i, if E i occurs and nothing if E i does not occur. The book B = {(E i, β i ) : i = 1,..., n} is coherent (or is not a Dutch Book) iff there is no betting strategy for gambler, ensuring a sure win! iff the assignment B extends to a probability measure on the algebra of formulas. Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 2 / 8

Motivation Therefore, in his foundation, de Finetti (tacitly) assumes that each event E satisfies the following conditions: 1 E is unknown at the moment when bookmaker publishes B, 2 Each possible realization of E must be an accessible information to both bookmaker and gambler. The violation of the above conditions leads either to a trivial bet, or to a null bet. In fact: Trivial: How much would you bet on now we are in Rome? and how much on Rome is in France? Null: Would you participate to a betting game on the sentence whose truth (or falsity) would be always unknown? e.g. the electron ɛ has speed s, and position p Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 3 / 8

Motivation Therefore, in his foundation, de Finetti (tacitly) assumes that each event E satisfies the following conditions: 1 E is unknown at the moment when bookmaker publishes B, 2 Each possible realization of E must be an accessible information to both bookmaker and gambler. The violation of the above conditions leads either to a trivial bet, or to a null bet. In fact: Trivial: How much would you bet on now we are in Rome? and how much on Rome is in France? Null: Would you participate to a betting game on the sentence whose truth (or falsity) would be always unknown? e.g. the electron ɛ has speed s, and position p Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 3 / 8

Motivation Therefore, in his foundation, de Finetti (tacitly) assumes that each event E satisfies the following conditions: 1 E is unknown at the moment when bookmaker publishes B, 2 Each possible realization of E must be an accessible information to both bookmaker and gambler. The violation of the above conditions leads either to a trivial bet, or to a null bet. In fact: Trivial: How much would you bet on now we are in Rome? and how much on Rome is in France? Null: Would you participate to a betting game on the sentence whose truth (or falsity) would be always unknown? e.g. the electron ɛ has speed s, and position p Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 3 / 8

Motivation Therefore, in his foundation, de Finetti (tacitly) assumes that each event E satisfies the following conditions: 1 E is unknown at the moment when bookmaker publishes B, 2 Each possible realization of E must be an accessible information to both bookmaker and gambler. The violation of the above conditions leads either to a trivial bet, or to a null bet. In fact: Trivial: How much would you bet on now we are in Rome? and how much on Rome is in France? Null: Would you participate to a betting game on the sentence whose truth (or falsity) would be always unknown? e.g. the electron ɛ has speed s, and position p Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 3 / 8

Motivation Therefore, in his foundation, de Finetti (tacitly) assumes that each event E satisfies the following conditions: 1 E is unknown at the moment when bookmaker publishes B, 2 Each possible realization of E must be an accessible information to both bookmaker and gambler. The violation of the above conditions leads either to a trivial bet, or to a null bet. In fact: Trivial: How much would you bet on now we are in Rome? and how much on Rome is in France? Null: Would you participate to a betting game on the sentence whose truth (or falsity) would be always unknown? e.g. the electron ɛ has speed s, and position p Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 3 / 8

Motivation Therefore, in his foundation, de Finetti (tacitly) assumes that each event E satisfies the following conditions: 1 E is unknown at the moment when bookmaker publishes B, 2 Each possible realization of E must be an accessible information to both bookmaker and gambler. The violation of the above conditions leads either to a trivial bet, or to a null bet. In fact: Trivial: How much would you bet on now we are in Rome? and how much on Rome is in France? Null: Would you participate to a betting game on the sentence whose truth (or falsity) would be always unknown? e.g. the electron ɛ has speed s, and position p Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 3 / 8

Partial valuations Formalization Let L = {q 1,..., q n } be a classical propositional language. The set of sentences SL = {ϕ, ψ, θ,...} is inductively built up from L through the propositional connectives,,, and, as usual. to denote falsum. [ϕ] is the equivalence class of ϕ (i.e., ψ [ϕ] iff ψ ϕ). A partial valuation on L is a map w : X L {0, 1} which, for a total valuation ω and for every q L is defined by { ω(q) if q X; w(q) = undefined otherwise. The class of all partial valuations over L is denoted by Ω P (L). For w : X {0, 1} and w : Y {0, 1} in Ω P (L) we say that w extends w (and we write w w ) if X Y, and for every x X, w(x) = w (x). Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 4 / 8

Partial valuations Formalization Let L = {q 1,..., q n } be a classical propositional language. The set of sentences SL = {ϕ, ψ, θ,...} is inductively built up from L through the propositional connectives,,, and, as usual. to denote falsum. [ϕ] is the equivalence class of ϕ (i.e., ψ [ϕ] iff ψ ϕ). A partial valuation on L is a map w : X L {0, 1} which, for a total valuation ω and for every q L is defined by { ω(q) if q X; w(q) = undefined otherwise. The class of all partial valuations over L is denoted by Ω P (L). For w : X {0, 1} and w : Y {0, 1} in Ω P (L) we say that w extends w (and we write w w ) if X Y, and for every x X, w(x) = w (x). Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 4 / 8

Partial valuations Formalization Let L = {q 1,..., q n } be a classical propositional language. The set of sentences SL = {ϕ, ψ, θ,...} is inductively built up from L through the propositional connectives,,, and, as usual. to denote falsum. [ϕ] is the equivalence class of ϕ (i.e., ψ [ϕ] iff ψ ϕ). A partial valuation on L is a map w : X L {0, 1} which, for a total valuation ω and for every q L is defined by { ω(q) if q X; w(q) = undefined otherwise. The class of all partial valuations over L is denoted by Ω P (L). For w : X {0, 1} and w : Y {0, 1} in Ω P (L) we say that w extends w (and we write w w ) if X Y, and for every x X, w(x) = w (x). Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 4 / 8

Partial valuations Formalization Let L = {q 1,..., q n } be a classical propositional language. The set of sentences SL = {ϕ, ψ, θ,...} is inductively built up from L through the propositional connectives,,, and, as usual. to denote falsum. [ϕ] is the equivalence class of ϕ (i.e., ψ [ϕ] iff ψ ϕ). A partial valuation on L is a map w : X L {0, 1} which, for a total valuation ω and for every q L is defined by { ω(q) if q X; w(q) = undefined otherwise. The class of all partial valuations over L is denoted by Ω P (L). For w : X {0, 1} and w : Y {0, 1} in Ω P (L) we say that w extends w (and we write w w ) if X Y, and for every x X, w(x) = w (x). Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 4 / 8

Formalization Realization Let ϕ SL, and let w Ω P (L). (1) We say that w realizes ϕ, written w ϕ, if w(ϕ) is defined. (2) We say that w realizes [ϕ], written w [ϕ], if w ψ for at least a ψ [ϕ]. In this case we assign w(γ) = w(ψ) for every γ [ϕ]. A partially evaluated frame (pef for short) is a pair (Ω P (L), R), where R is a transitive binary accessibility relation on Ω P (L). A pef K = (Ω P (L), R) is said to be: (M) Monotonic if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if R(w, w ), then w w. (A) Full accessible if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if w w, then R(w, w ). Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 5 / 8

Formalization Realization Let ϕ SL, and let w Ω P (L). (1) We say that w realizes ϕ, written w ϕ, if w(ϕ) is defined. (2) We say that w realizes [ϕ], written w [ϕ], if w ψ for at least a ψ [ϕ]. In this case we assign w(γ) = w(ψ) for every γ [ϕ]. A partially evaluated frame (pef for short) is a pair (Ω P (L), R), where R is a transitive binary accessibility relation on Ω P (L). A pef K = (Ω P (L), R) is said to be: (M) Monotonic if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if R(w, w ), then w w. (A) Full accessible if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if w w, then R(w, w ). Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 5 / 8

Formalization Realization Let ϕ SL, and let w Ω P (L). (1) We say that w realizes ϕ, written w ϕ, if w(ϕ) is defined. (2) We say that w realizes [ϕ], written w [ϕ], if w ψ for at least a ψ [ϕ]. In this case we assign w(γ) = w(ψ) for every γ [ϕ]. A partially evaluated frame (pef for short) is a pair (Ω P (L), R), where R is a transitive binary accessibility relation on Ω P (L). A pef K = (Ω P (L), R) is said to be: (M) Monotonic if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if R(w, w ), then w w. (A) Full accessible if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if w w, then R(w, w ). Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 5 / 8

Formalization Realization Let ϕ SL, and let w Ω P (L). (1) We say that w realizes ϕ, written w ϕ, if w(ϕ) is defined. (2) We say that w realizes [ϕ], written w [ϕ], if w ψ for at least a ψ [ϕ]. In this case we assign w(γ) = w(ψ) for every γ [ϕ]. A partially evaluated frame (pef for short) is a pair (Ω P (L), R), where R is a transitive binary accessibility relation on Ω P (L). A pef K = (Ω P (L), R) is said to be: (M) Monotonic if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if R(w, w ), then w w. (A) Full accessible if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if w w, then R(w, w ). Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 5 / 8

Formalization Realization Let ϕ SL, and let w Ω P (L). (1) We say that w realizes ϕ, written w ϕ, if w(ϕ) is defined. (2) We say that w realizes [ϕ], written w [ϕ], if w ψ for at least a ψ [ϕ]. In this case we assign w(γ) = w(ψ) for every γ [ϕ]. A partially evaluated frame (pef for short) is a pair (Ω P (L), R), where R is a transitive binary accessibility relation on Ω P (L). A pef K = (Ω P (L), R) is said to be: (M) Monotonic if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if R(w, w ), then w w. (A) Full accessible if, for every w, w Ω P (L), if w w, then R(w, w ). Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 5 / 8

Formalization Events, Facts, and Inaccessible propositions Definition Let (Ω P (L), R) be a pef, w Ω P (L) and ϕ SL. Then we say that a proposition [ϕ] is: A w-event iff w [ϕ], and for every w Ω P (L) such that w w and w [ϕ], R(w, w ). A w-fact iff w [ϕ]. A w-inaccessible proposition iff w [ϕ] and for every w such that w [ϕ], R(w, w ) For every w Ω P (L) we denote by E(w) and F(w) the classes of w-events, and w-facts respectively. Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 6 / 8

Results Theorem Let B = {[ϕ i ] = β i : i = 1,..., n} be a coherent w-book, let [ψ] be not a w-events, and let B = B {[ψ] = γ} be a propositional book extending B. Then the following hold: (1) If [ψ] is a w-facts, then B is coherent if and only if γ = w(ψ); (2) If [ψ] is w-inaccessible, then B is coherent if and only if γ = 0. Theorem Let (Ω P (L), R) be a fully accessible pef. Then for every w Ω P (L), E(w) is closed under the classical connectives. Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 7 / 8

Results Theorem Let B = {[ϕ i ] = β i : i = 1,..., n} be a coherent w-book, let [ψ] be not a w-events, and let B = B {[ψ] = γ} be a propositional book extending B. Then the following hold: (1) If [ψ] is a w-facts, then B is coherent if and only if γ = w(ψ); (2) If [ψ] is w-inaccessible, then B is coherent if and only if γ = 0. Theorem Let (Ω P (L), R) be a fully accessible pef. Then for every w Ω P (L), E(w) is closed under the classical connectives. Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 7 / 8

Results Future Work (Probability!) 1 for each w, and for each w-event [ϕ], the a w-probability P w ([ϕ]) is the probability of [ϕ] conditioned by the w-facts. 2 We can give an answer to the de Finetti-Bayes principle: All probability is conditional on what we already know to be the case. But distinguishing between the probability of a conditional event, and the probability of an event conditioned by a fact! 3 We are formalizing the following intuition by de Finetti: Every [...] probability, is conditional; not only on the mentality or psychology of the individual involved, at the time in question, but also, and especially, on the state of information in which he finds himself at that moment Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 8 / 8

Results Future Work (Probability!) 1 for each w, and for each w-event [ϕ], the a w-probability P w ([ϕ]) is the probability of [ϕ] conditioned by the w-facts. 2 We can give an answer to the de Finetti-Bayes principle: All probability is conditional on what we already know to be the case. But distinguishing between the probability of a conditional event, and the probability of an event conditioned by a fact! 3 We are formalizing the following intuition by de Finetti: Every [...] probability, is conditional; not only on the mentality or psychology of the individual involved, at the time in question, but also, and especially, on the state of information in which he finds himself at that moment Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 8 / 8

Results Future Work (Probability!) 1 for each w, and for each w-event [ϕ], the a w-probability P w ([ϕ]) is the probability of [ϕ] conditioned by the w-facts. 2 We can give an answer to the de Finetti-Bayes principle: All probability is conditional on what we already know to be the case. But distinguishing between the probability of a conditional event, and the probability of an event conditioned by a fact! 3 We are formalizing the following intuition by de Finetti: Every [...] probability, is conditional; not only on the mentality or psychology of the individual involved, at the time in question, but also, and especially, on the state of information in which he finds himself at that moment Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 8 / 8

Results Future Work (Probability!) 1 for each w, and for each w-event [ϕ], the a w-probability P w ([ϕ]) is the probability of [ϕ] conditioned by the w-facts. 2 We can give an answer to the de Finetti-Bayes principle: All probability is conditional on what we already know to be the case. But distinguishing between the probability of a conditional event, and the probability of an event conditioned by a fact! 3 We are formalizing the following intuition by de Finetti: Every [...] probability, is conditional; not only on the mentality or psychology of the individual involved, at the time in question, but also, and especially, on the state of information in which he finds himself at that moment Flaminio, Hosni (IIIA-SNS) CILC - Roma, June 2012 CILC 2012 8 / 8