{"id":4302,"date":"2021-02-14T23:14:21","date_gmt":"2021-02-14T22:14:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/?p=4302"},"modified":"2021-05-20T18:38:52","modified_gmt":"2021-05-20T16:38:52","slug":"lira-session-francesca-zaffora-blando","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/2021\/02\/lira-session-francesca-zaffora-blando\/","title":{"rendered":"LIRa Session: Francesca Zaffora Blando"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Speaker: <a href=\"https:\/\/francescazafforablando.com\/\">Francesca Zaffora Blando<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Date and Time: Thursday, May&nbsp;27th 2021, 16:30-18:00, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.timeanddate.com\/time\/zone\/netherlands\/amsterdam\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Amsterdam time<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Venue: <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/guidelines-for-online-sessions\/\">online<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Title: Weak merging of opinions for computationally limited agents<b>.<\/b><br \/>\n<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><em>Abstract. <\/em>A standard objection to subjective Bayesianism is that appealing to subjective probabilities threatens the objectivity of scientific inquiry. A standard Bayesian response to this charge relies on merging-of-opinions theorems: a family of results which establish that, as long as their respective priors are sufficiently compatible, two Bayesian agents with differing initial beliefs are guaranteed to almost surely reach a consensus with increasing evidence. So, objectivity can be recovered in the form of intersubjective agreement. One of the most well-known such results is the Blackwell-Dubins Theorem, which shows that Bayesian conditioning leads to a strong form of merging of opinions, provided that the agents agree on probability zero events to begin with\u2014i.e., provided that their priors are mutually absolutely continuous. Since absolute continuity is a rather strong form of compatibility between priors, it is natural to wonder whether merging of opinions\u2014and what type of merging of opinions\u2014can be achieved with weaker assumptions. In this talk, I will address this question from the perspective of computationally limited Bayesian agents: agents whose priors are computable. I will argue that, for computable Bayesian learners, it is natural to appeal to the theory of algorithmic randomness\u2014a branch of computability theory aimed at characterizing the concept of effective measure-theoretic typicality\u2014to define notions of compatibility between priors. We will see that the proposed notions of compatibility induced by algorithmic randomness naturally correspond to restricted forms of absolute continuity. Then, I will show that some of these notions, while too weak to ensure merging of opinions in the strong sense of Blackwell and Dubins, nonetheless suffice to attain a weaker type of merging, first studied by Kalai and Lehrer, which only requires reaching a consensus over finite-horizon events.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Speaker: Francesca Zaffora Blando<br \/>\nDate and Time: Thursday, May&nbsp;27th 2021, 16:30-18:00, Amsterdam time.<br \/>\nVenue: online.<br \/>\nTitle: Weak merging of opinions for computationally limited agents.<\/p>\n<p>Abstract. A standard objection to subjective Bayesianism is that appealing to subjective probabilities threatens the objectivity of scientific inquiry. A standard Bayesian response to this charge relies on merging-of-opinions theorems: a family of results which [&#8230;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4302","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-events"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4302","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/12"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4302"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4302\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4399,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4302\/revisions\/4399"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4302"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4302"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projects.illc.uva.nl\/lgc\/seminar\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4302"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}