= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
cousin_it comments on Another attempt to explain UDT - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (50)
It's not an implementation of UDT in the sense that it doesn't talk about all possible programs and universal prior on them. If you consider UDT as generalizing to ADT, where probability assumptions are dropped, then sure.
Um, I don't consider the universal prior to be part of UDT proper. UDT can run on top of any prior, e.g. when you use it to solve toy problems as Wei did, you use small specialized priors.
There are no priors used in those toy problems, just one utility definition of interest.