Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Limbo – A Reasoning System for First-Order Limited Belief

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 27 posts

Re: Limbo – A Reasoning System for First-Order Limited Belief

#11

Post by theoh »

shiftoutbox wrote: post #4

Limbo is a programming language for writing distributed systems and is the language used to write applications for the Inferno operating system. It was designed at Bell Labs by Sean Dorward, Phil Winterbottom, and Rob Pike. Google the name of your project before naming it .

See also Newsqueak (also Rob Pike) and the Squeak implementation of smalltalk.

Would suggest "There is already a software project called Limbo, although it's in a quite different domain." In fact there is already also this: https://sourceforge.net/projects/limbopcemulator/ and the Limbo language is almost definitely not in serious use anywhere. (Having bought a copy of Inferno a few years ago and played with it, it didn't feel like a mature platform.)

Re: Limbo – A Reasoning System for First-Order Limited Belief

#12

Post by Lambdanaut »

crawfordcomeaux wrote: post #7
dragonwriter wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, we'd have to have a good model for human decision making.

If we were to start with this as the foundation for modeling human decisions, where does this fail as a model?

What resolution are you looking for? All models fail to be the thing they're modelling.

The first and obvious answer is that "this is software running on hardware, as apposed to being biologically-based".

It might sound like I'm being facetious but your question is really that broad.

Re: Limbo – A Reasoning System for First-Order Limited Belief

#13

Post by drdeca »

Lambdanaut wrote: post #12
crawfordcomeaux wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we were to start with this as the foundation for modeling human decisions, where does this fail as a model?

What resolution are you looking for? All models fail to be the thing they're modelling. The first and obvious answer is that "this is software running on hardware, as apposed to being biologically-based". It might sound like I'm being facetious but your question is really that broad.

"What sort of predictions that this makes are contradicted by observation"?

Re: Limbo – A Reasoning System for First-Order Limited Belief

#16

Post by crawfordcomeaux »

dragonwriter wrote: post #8
crawfordcomeaux wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we were to start with this as the foundation for modeling human decisions, where does this fail as a model?

Its kind of hard to do the measurements necessary to answer that question without being able to accurately and objectively measure actual human beliefs (which may not be the same as self-reported beliefs.)

Ok. What about using inaccurate, subjective measures? How well does it model self-reported beliefs?

Re: Limbo – A Reasoning System for First-Order Limited Belief

#17

Post by crawfordcomeaux »

drdeca wrote: post #13
Lambdanaut wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What resolution are you looking for? All models fail to be the thing they're modelling. The first and obvious answer is that "this is software running on hardware, as apposed to being biologically-based". It might sound like I'm being facetious but your question is really that broad.

"What sort of predictions that this makes are contradicted by observation"?

This is what I meant. Thanks for providing the clarification I didn't think to include.

Re: Limbo – A Reasoning System for First-Order Limited Belief

#18

Post by crawfordcomeaux »

sirdutin wrote: post #15
crawfordcomeaux wrote: post #5

Would anyone be willing to explain what's different between this & how humans make decisions?

Hah! Good one! Nice try, Bezos!

Thanks for this comment. I can't wait to see what the system says about how to market to those who'll create a new HN name for the sake of doxxing someone!

Here at Amazon, we care about the little things like that because we have to. For now. Again, thanks for helping us get one step closer to not having to.

EDIT: Save those downvotes for when posts are incapable of contributing at all. Jokes you don't find funny don't count. I laughed at the parent post, so it contributed to my enjoyment.

Re: Limbo – A Reasoning System for First-Order Limited Belief

#20

Post by _neural_ »

zokier wrote: post #19

Has anyone seen logic systems that are able to reason about probabilities? As far as I understand Limbo (and other logic systems) are limited to saying something is true or false, but unable to say that something has X% chance of being true.

Take a look at Distributed Situation-state Spaces [1].

[1] http://www.let.rug.nl/festschriftnerbonne/08.%20Brouwer%20et...

Post reply on HN