peer reviews

First off, this is a very clearly written entry, with illustrative examples.

A minor question: Is there any reason that you use a lower case x for a random variable in the Definition of Value of Information?

Another thing is that the value of imperfect information is defined as a sub-optimal value due to some noise. In the section on the value of perfect information, it sounds like that the value of information of weather forecast is imperfect, compared with that of weather itself. So, can the information being indirect count as noise in this context?

Hi, thanks for the feedback.

I think the lower case x is a mistake because I was combining the notation from different sources - thanks for pointing it out.

Yes, I think 'weather forecast' is essentially a noisy version of 'weather'. So getting perfect information about the 'weather forecast' is like getting imperfect information about 'weather'. I'll look at changing this to make it clearer