{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025780189959294438, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.362068965517241, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Adding possibilistic knowledge to probabilities makes many problems algorithmically decidable

Many physical theories accurately predict which events are possible and which are not, or – in situations where probabilistic (e.g., quantum) effects are important – predict the probabilities of different possible outcomes. At first glance, it may seem that this probabilistic information is all we need. We show, however, that to adequately describe physicists’ reasoning, it is important to also take into account additional knowledge – about what is possible and what is not. We show that this knowledge can be described in terms of possibility theory, and that the presence of this knowledge makes many problems algorithmically decidable.