Abstract
AbstractIn this article, I consider the status of several statements analogous to the Church–Turing thesis that assert that some definition of algorithmic randomness captures the intuitive conception of randomness. I argue that we should not only reject the theses that have appeared in the algorithmic randomness literature, but more generally that we ought not evaluate the adequacy of a definition of randomness on the basis of whether it captures the so-called intuitive conception of randomness to begin with. Instead, I argue that a more promising alternative is to evaluate the adequacy of a definition of randomness on the basis of whether it captures what I refer to as a “notion of almost everywhere typicality.” In support of my main claims, I will appeal to recent work in showing the connection between of algorithmic randomness and certain “almost everywhere” theorems from classical mathematics.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Logic,Philosophy,Mathematics (miscellaneous)
Reference35 articles.
1. Combinatorial foundations of information theory and the calculus of probabilities;Kolmogorov;Uspekhi Matematicheskikh Nauk,1983
2. Osherson D. & Weinstein S . (2008). Recognizing strong random reals, this Review, 1(01), 56–63.
3. The definition of random sequences
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献