I might be thinking of it too much in terms of classical Bayesianism, so let me know if my question is confused and doesn’t make sense:
Is this just a way to count other agents’ predictions as evidence, or is there also a differnce in how a single agent predicts and behaves in a world with no other agents?
I’m familiar, in classical bayesianism, with the fact that other agents’ predictions can influence my prediction. There’s Aumann agreement theorem and so on. Seeing another agent predict X will increase the probability I assign X at least a little.
Is this framework expanding on that, or proposing something else?
Interesting outlook!
I might be thinking of it too much in terms of classical Bayesianism, so let me know if my question is confused and doesn’t make sense:
Is this just a way to count other agents’ predictions as evidence, or is there also a differnce in how a single agent predicts and behaves in a world with no other agents?
I’m familiar, in classical bayesianism, with the fact that other agents’ predictions can influence my prediction. There’s Aumann agreement theorem and so on. Seeing another agent predict X will increase the probability I assign X at least a little.
Is this framework expanding on that, or proposing something else?