This is interesting! I think it would also be useful to talk about the standard terminology in the field. Some of those terms are:
Aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty
Decisions under risk vs decisions under ignorance
Reasons I think it’s useful to talk about standard terminology:
Allows you to converse with others and understand their work more easily
Allows readers to follow up and connect with a larger body of work
Communicates to experts that you’ve seriously engaged with the field and understand it
In this particular case, I’d be interesting in hearing how your categories map to the standard ones. Or, if you think they don’t, it would be interesting to hear why that is. What are the inadequacies of the standard terms and categories?
I actually looked at standard categories but AFAICT there is no standard. Knightian uncertainty and statistical uncertainty are one standard that are almost synonymous with epistemic and aleatory, which are fairly synonymous with model uncertainty and base uncertainty, hence my use of knightian. However, those definitions don’t include the difference between transparent and opaque risk mentioned above.
The definitions of risk and uncertainty seemed to be defined many different places, and frequently the definitions are swapped in different sources. Ignorance and uncertainty are sometimes seen as synonymous, sometimes not.
Basically, I created my own terms because I thought the current terms were muddied enough that using them would create more confusion than clarity. I used existing terms for solutions to different types of risk because the opposite was true.
One place where I didn’t look as hard to find existing categories is the “Types of knightian risk” part. I couldn’t find any existing breakdowns of this and as far as I know it’s original, but there may be an existing list and I was simply using the wrong search terms.