diff --git a/content/blog/intro-dempster-shafer-possibility.md b/content/blog/intro-dempster-shafer-possibility.md
deleted file mode 100644
index 6edf5bc..0000000
--- a/content/blog/intro-dempster-shafer-possibility.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,120 +0,0 @@
----
-title: "Introduction to Dempster-Shafer Theory"
-date: 2024-10-29T12:38:21-04:00
-draft: false
-tags: []
-math: true
-medium_enabled: false
----
-
-Imagine sitting by a tree full of birds. You know the tree only has a Yellow Rumped Warbler ($w$), a Northern Cardinal ($c$), and an American Goldfinch ($g$). These birds are respectful in that they don't call at the same time.
-
-You make the following observations of bird calls:
-$$
-obs = w, w, c, g, g, w
-$$
-What's the probability that we hear a Warbler next assuming the calls are independent from each other?
-$$
-count_w = 3, total = 6, P(w) = \frac{3}{6} = 0.5
-$$
-This example assumes that we're bird call experts and are able to uniquely determine each bird call. What happens if our observations are *imprecise*? 
-
-## Dempster-Shafer Theory (DST)
-
-DST, otherwise known as belief functions theory or the theory of evidence, looks at what happens if we allow each observation to be a disjunction ($\vee$)?
-$$
-obs = w \vee c \vee g, c, w \vee c, w \vee g
-$$
-There can be many reasons for this. Maybe our hearing isn't so good. There's additional noise around you disrupting your sensing.
-
-Formally, let us define $\Omega$ to be our event space. In this example, this is the set of possible bird calls.
-$$
-\Omega = \\{w, c, g\\}
-$$
-**The mass function** $m: A \rightarrow [0, 1], \forall A \subseteq \Omega$ assigns a value between 0 and 1 to every possible subset of our event space. The set $\\{w, g\\}$ represents the observation $w \vee g$.
-
-An important property is that the sum of all the masses are equal to 1.
-$$
-\sum_{A \subseteq \Omega} m(A) = 1
-$$
-In order to derive this mass function, we can normalize our observations from earlier.
-$$
-m(\\{w, c, g\\}) = \frac{1}{4}, m(\\{c\\}) = \frac{1}{4}, m(\\{w, c\\}) = \frac{1}{4}, m(\\{w, g\\}) = \frac{1}{4}
-$$
-We assign the value $0$ to all other subsets of $\Omega$. By definition, $m(\\{\\}) = 0$.
-
-**The plausibility measure** for a disjunctive set $A$ is the sum of all the mass values of the subets of $\Omega$ that intersect with $A$.
-$$
-Pl(A) = \sum_{B \cap A \ne \emptyset}{m(B)}
-$$
-In our example,
-$$
-\begin{align*}
-Pl(\\{w\\}) &= m(\\{w, c, g\\}) + m(\\{w, c\\}) + m(\\{w,g\\}) + m(\\{w\\}) \\\\
-		  &= \frac{3}{4}
-\end{align*}
-$$
-**The necessity measure** is more restrictive in that we only look at the summation of the masses of the subsets of $A$.
-$$
-Nec(A) = \sum_{B \subseteq A}{m(B)}
-$$
-Consider an arbitrary event $a \in \Omega$. Then,
-$$
-\begin{align*}
-Nec(\\{a\\}) &= m(\\{a\\}) + m(\\{\\}) \\\\
-             &= m(\\{a\\})
-\end{align*}
-$$
-Therefore in our example,
-$$
-Nec(\\{w\\}) = 0, Nec(\\{c\\}) = \frac{1}{4}, Nec(\\{g\\}) = 0
-$$
-Another example,
-$$
-\begin{align*}
-Nec(\\{w, c\\}) &= m(\\{w, c\\}) + m(\\{c\\}) + m(\\{w\\}) + m(\\{\\}) \\\\
-                &= \frac{1}{4} + \frac{1}{4} + 0 + 0 \\\
-                &= 0.5
-\end{align*}
-$$
-**The probability measure** is bounded by the necessity and plausibility measures.
-
-For a disjunctive set $A$,
-$$
-Nec(A) \le P(A) \le Pl(A)
-$$
-Extending probability to a range of values gives us a way to model *ignorance*. We say an agent is completely ignorant if $|\Omega| > 1$ and $m(\Omega) = 1$.
-
-Consider a completely ignorant agent where $\Omega = \\{w, c, g\\}$.
-
-Then,
-$$
-\begin{align*}
-Nec(\\{w\\}) \le P(\\{w\\}) &\le Pl(\\{w\\}) \\\\
-m(\\{w\\}) \le P(\\{w\\}) &\le m(\\{w\\}) + m(\\{w, c\\}) + m(\\{w, g\\}) + m(\\{w, c, g\\}) \\\\
-0 \le P(\\{w\\}) &\le 1
-\end{align*}
-$$
-Probability theory is a subset of Dempster-Shafer theory. In order to see this, let us look at an example of observations where there is no disjunction.
-$$
-obs = w, w, c, g, g, w
-$$
-Normalize our observations to derive the mass function:
-$$
-m(\\{w\\}) = \frac{1}{2}, m(\\{c\\}) = \frac{1}{6}, m(\\{g\\}) = \frac{1}{3}
-$$
-The mass function in this example is $0$ for every non-singleton subset of $\Omega$.
-
-What is the probability range for $w$?
-$$
-\begin{align*}
-Nec(\\{w\\}) \le P(\\{w\\}) &\le Pl(\\{w\\}) \\\\
-m(\\{w\\}) \le P(\\{w\\}) &\le m(\\{w\\}) + m(\\{w, g\\}) + m(\\{w, c\\}) + m(\\{w, c, g\\}) \\\\
-\frac{1}{2} \le P(\\{w\\}) &\le \frac{1}{2} + 0 + 0 + 0
-\end{align*}
-$$
-Therefore, $P(w) = \frac{1}{2}$ as expected in probability theory.
-
-## Conclusion
-
-Dempster-Shafer theory is an attempt at addressing *imprecise observations* through disjunctive events. It extends probability theory to consider not just a single value, but a range of possible values. This allows the model to decouple uncertainty from *ignorance*.
diff --git a/themes/pulp b/themes/pulp
index 13ecf4a..31dfeaa 160000
--- a/themes/pulp
+++ b/themes/pulp
@@ -1 +1 @@
-Subproject commit 13ecf4a4a362cbb8a10ff5260298581eb1fa6c99
+Subproject commit 31dfeaaa0b5654a419b75c7f694aa99b0e36e0ae