To your second point, very much yes. I am also working on a much bigger framework for world-modeling, still along the lines of Safeguarded AI TA1.1, which takes this notion of beliefs as a central ingredient in its semantics. The syntax is most of the work. By syntax/semantics I mean the same thing as sense/referent and intension/extension.
The purpose of the semantics is to ground judgments about observational equivalence about belief states, but when we are exploring the hypothesis space about infinite-dimensional as finite creatures, we need rich languages for expressing our beliefs with finite sequences of bits.
Richardson’s PDGs are in my opinion the best syntax published to date.
To your second point, very much yes. I am also working on a much bigger framework for world-modeling, still along the lines of Safeguarded AI TA1.1, which takes this notion of beliefs as a central ingredient in its semantics. The syntax is most of the work. By syntax/semantics I mean the same thing as sense/referent and intension/extension.
The purpose of the semantics is to ground judgments about observational equivalence about belief states, but when we are exploring the hypothesis space about infinite-dimensional
Richardson’s PDGs are in my opinion the best syntax published to date.