HamletHenna comments on Open Thread, July 1-15, 2012 - Less Wrong

2 Post author: OpenThreadGuy 01 July 2012 10:45PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (150)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: [deleted] 08 July 2012 08:36:47PM *  10 points [-]

I've been reading stuff by philospher Wolfgang Spohn. His recent decision theory stuff (like Dependency equilibria and the causal structure of decision and game situations or Reversing 30 years of discussion: why causal decision theorists should one-box) is kind of cool. Like TDT, he talks about rational agents deciding on the basis of "reflexive entangled decision situations" and like UDT he proposes that agents should decide to follow the decisions they would have made in "earlier situations". It's not quite LW style reductionism, but it's close-ish, and it increases my estimation that LW decision theory would be well recieved in academia (after a little self promotion).

Comment author: lukeprog 12 August 2012 05:59:12PM 2 points [-]

I stumbled on Spohn's "Reversing 30 years..." today via Choice & Inference, and it looks to me like the single most LW-relevant decision theory paper I've ever seen in a mainstream journal. Have you stumbled on any other good finds recently?

Comment author: danieldewey 08 July 2012 09:25:07PM 0 points [-]

Thank you for posting this! What led you to it, or how did you find it?

Comment author: [deleted] 08 July 2012 11:34:00PM 2 points [-]

I just dig through google scholar till I find something good. The first paper cites "Conditioning and Intervening" by Meek and Glymour, which I looked at recently, so maybe that's how. I can also get to it by searching for "decision theory" within papers citing Pearl's "Causality" (though it's a few pages in). Also, I think Ledwig mentioned Spohn's older stuff in her dissertation on Newcomb's problem. Kind of hard to reconstruct search paths.

Comment author: danieldewey 09 July 2012 12:36:04AM 0 points [-]

Makes sense. Thanks.