= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Gunnar_Zarncke comments on Proper value learning through indifference - 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)
I very much liked the analogy to Conservation of Expected Evidence---it strikes me as potentially deep; we want a system where EU and VoI are balanced such that it will never 'try' to end up with particular values, just as a Bayesian will never try to find evidence pointing in a particular direction.
I'm not sure who originally coined the phrase "Cake or Death problem" but I have a suspicion that it was me, and if so, I strongly suspect that I said it at a workshop and that I did it just to give the problem a 5-second handle that would work for a workshop. It's possible we should rename it before anyone publishes a paper.
Cake or death appears to be a minor meme: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cake_or_Death or google.
Yes. I am suggesting that it seems quite probable to me that I am the one who took that Eddie Izzard routine, which I have seen, and turned it into the name of value learning problems.