Bets and Boundaries: Assigning Probabilities to Imprecisely Specified Events

Uncertainty and vagueness/imprecision are not the same: one can be certain about events described using vague predicates and about imprecisely specified events, just as one can be uncertain about precisely specified events. Exactly because of this, a question arises about how one ought to assign probabilities to imprecisely specified events in the case when no possible available evidence will eradicate the imprecision (because, say, of the limits of accuracy of a measuring device). Modelling imprecision by rough sets over an approximation space presents an especially tractable case to help get one’s bearings. Two solutions present themselves: the first takes as upper and lower probabilities of the event X the (exact) probabilities assigned X’s upper and lower rough-set approximations; the second, motivated both by formal considerations and by a simple betting argument, is to treat X’s rough-set approximation as a conditional event and assign to it a point-valued (conditional) probability. With rough sets over an approximation space we get a lot of good behaviour. For example, in the first construction mentioned the lower probabilities are n-monotone, for every . When we examine other models of approximation/imprecision/vagueness, and in particular, proximity spaces, we lose a lot of that good behaviour. In the literature there is not (even) agreement on the definition of upper and lower approximations for events (subsets) in the underlying domain. Betting considerations suggest one choice and, again, ways to assign upper and lower and point-valued probabilities, but nothing works well. Special Issue on Vagueness Edited by Rosanna Keefe and Libor Bêhounek     

Spicy Adjectives and Nominal Donkeys: Capturing Semantic Deviance Using Compositionality in Distributional Spaces

Sophisticated senator and legislative onion. Whether or not you have ever heard of these things, we all have some intuition that one of them makes much less sense than the other. In this paper, we introduce a large dataset of human judgments about novel adjective‐noun phrases. We use these data to test an approach to semantic deviance based on phrase representations derived with compositional distributional semantic methods, that is, methods that derive word meanings from contextual information, and approximate phrase meanings by combining word meanings. We present several simple measures extracted from distributional representations of words and phrases, and we show that they have a significant impact on predicting the acceptability of novel adjective‐noun phrases even when a number of alternative measures classically employed in studies of compound processing and bigram plausibility are taken into account. Our results show that the extent to which an attributive adjective alters the distributional representation of the noun is the most significant factor in modeling the distinction between acceptable and deviant phrases. Our study extends current applications of compositional distributional semantic methods to linguistically and cognitively interesting problems, and it offers a new, quantitatively precise approach to the challenge of predicting when humans will find novel linguistic expressions acceptable and when they will not.     

Alfred Stieglitz and Donald Judd: Titans of Creative Spaces

Inclusive, non-elitist art spaces are mounted by remarkably talented, creative individuals. Alfred Stieglitz and Donald Judd were two such individuals. Stieglitz's space was an intimate urban art gallery in Manhattan while Judd's space in Marfa, Texas was expansive, isolated, and rural. Aside from sharing the usual characteristics of the very creative, both were charismatic, physically attractive, intelligent men who held forceful visions about art. Unlike most of their peers, they had the capacity to write well and speak convincingly. Their resolute confidence and aesthetic competencies enabled them to attract and hold astute colleagues. Last they had the necessary expertise and connections to obtain resources required to maintain their vision.     

Measuring Graded Membership: The Case of Color

This paper considers Kamp and Partee's account of graded membership within a conceptual spaces framework and puts the account to the test in the domain of colors. Three experiments are reported that are meant to determine, on the one hand, the regions in color space where the typical instances of blue and green are located and, on the other hand, the degrees of blueness/greenness of various shades in the blue–green region as judged by human observers. From the locations of the typical blue and typical green regions in conjunction with Kamp and Partee's account follow degrees of blueness/greenness for the color shades we are interested in. These predicted degrees are compared with the judged degrees, as obtained in the experiments. The results of the comparison support the account of graded membership at issue.     

Some Results on Modal Axiomatization and Definability for Topological Spaces

We consider two topological interpretations of the modal diamond—as the closure operator (C-semantics) and as the derived set operator (d-semantics). We call the logics arising from these interpretations C-logics and d-logics, respectively. We axiomatize a number of subclasses of the class of nodec spaces with respect to both semantics, and characterize exactly which of these classes are modally definable. It is demonstrated that the d-semantics is more expressive than the C-semantics. In particular, we show that the d-logics of the six classes of spaces considered in the paper are pairwise distinct, while the C-logics of some of them coincide. Mathematics Subject Classifications (2000): 03B45, 54G99. Presented by Michael Zakharyaschev     

Along the border: affective promotion or inhibition of conduct in urban spaces / A lo largo de la frontera: promoción o inhibición afectiva de la conducta en los espacios urbanos

Abstract

The concepts of borders, tensegrity and goal-oriented meaningful conduct are used to study the conditions in which affects and conducts can (or cannot) emerge in urban spaces. We assume psychological phenomena are liminal and emerge in the border zones between different individual and collective states. The main focus of the study is the process of affective meaning-making that takes place at specific locations (the border zones) in urban living. Through an example of autoethnography, we try to understand how the symbolic space is used in everyday life to produce, maintain and demolish signs that self-regulate and hetero-regulate complex atmospheres, affects and conducts.     

A geometric principle of indifference

That one's degrees of belief at any one time obey the axioms of probability theory is widely regarded as a necessary condition for static rationality. Many theorists hold that it is also a sufficient condition, but according to critics this yields too subjective an account of static rationality. However, there are currently no good proposals as to how to obtain a tenable stronger probabilistic theory of static rationality. In particular, the idea that one might achieve the desired strengthening by adding some symmetry principle to the probability axioms has appeared hard to maintain. Starting from an idea of Carnap and drawing on relatively recent work in cognitive science, this paper argues that conceptual spaces provide the tools to devise an objective probabilistic account of static rationality. Specifically, we propose a principle that derives prior degrees of belief from the geometrical structure of concepts.     

Secularism and securitisation: the imaginary threat of religious minorities in Canadian public spaces

ABSTRACT

From the assumed physical threat of a ceremonial Kirpan in an elementary school carried by a Sikh child, to the fictional possibility of rich, Arab, Muslim University students utilising their implicitly understood patriarchal power to subjugate all women from access to common swimming pools, Canada has become increasingly replete with examples of using religious minorities as a danger to secure public spaces for societies most privileged. Since 9/11, this has become a far too common public discourse on maintaining close surveillance, scrutiny and regulations for those religious and racialised Canadian minorities associated with the ‘war on terror’. Promoting public spaces, especially public-school spaces, as ‘secular’ has become the argument of supposed non-bias in ensuring safety and equality for the wider population, all the while leaving many of those used as an example of threat to wonder if the ultimate intent is to preserve white, Christian (and Christian cultural) privilege. This article proposes to examine cases since 9/11 that have problematised racialised groups associated with the terrorism in public schooling to the benefit of maintaining ‘Old Stock’ status quo.