= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
timtyler comments on Model Uncertainty, Pascalian Reasoning and Utilitarianism - 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 (154)
Since even irrational agents can be modelled using a utility function, no "reforming" is needed.
How can they be modeled with a utility function?
As explained here:
Thanks for the reference.
It seems though that the reward function might be extremely complicated in general (in fact I suspect that this paper can be used to show that the reward function can be potentially uncomputable).
The whole universe may well be computable - according to the Church–Turing–Deutsch principle. If it isn't the above analysis may not apply.
I agree with jsteinhardt, thanks for the reference.
I agree that the reward functions will vary in complexity. If you do the usual thing in Solomonoff induction, where the plausibility of a reward function decreases exponentially with its size, so far as I can tell you can infer reward fuctions from behavior, if you can infer behavior.
We need to infer a utility function for somebody if we're going to help them get what they want, since a utility function is the only reasonable description I know of what an agent wants.