We present standard results about representations of strictly proper measures of accuracy. We also show the same results hold when measuring accuracy of previsions more generally.
We argue that the model of probabilities needs revising when non-classical logics are considered. For strong-Kleene logic we suggest a belief-pair, and for supervaluational logic adopt imprecise probability.
What do measures of accuracy which are risk-weightedly strictly-proper look like? Some results.
We suggest that accuracy considerations should apply to the imprecise by using: what a set recommends is the set of what the individuals in it recommend. This results in a surprisingly nice picture of accuracy for the imprecise.
What does the space of all possible worlds look like? Especially when we have beliefs-about-beliefs.