cousin_it comments on Single player extensive-form games as a model of UDT - Less Wrong

9 Post author: cousin_it 25 February 2014 10:43AM

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

Comments (26)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: cousin_it 10 September 2014 03:56:47PM *  0 points [-]

If you're assuming the proof-searching model then yes, but that's the same old spurious proof problem isn't it?

Yeah.

If an agent one-boxes when both boxes are filled then the predictor will predict that the agent one-boxes when both boxes are filled, and so both boxes will be filed, and so the agent one-boxes unconditionally.

I'm confused, which implementation of the predictor are you assuming in that sentence? I don't think that every predictor will be able to figure out every true statement about the agent...

Comment author: lackofcheese 11 September 2014 06:45:15AM *  0 points [-]

Yeah, a predictor won't necessarily figure out every true statement, but my original point was about the transparent Newcomb's, in which case if Omega finds that the agent one-boxes whenever Omega fills both boxes, then Omega will fill both and the agent will one-box.

In the case of the proof-searching model things aren't quite as nice, but you can still get pretty far. If the predictor has a sufficiently high proof limit and knows that it fills both boxes whenever it finds a proof of one-boxing, then a short enough proof that the agent one-boxes whenever both boxes are filled should be sufficient (I'm quite sure a Löbian argument holds here).

So yes, from the predictor's point of view, a proof that the agent one-boxes whenever both boxes are filled should be sufficient. Now you just need the agent to not be stupid...