David3 comments on Measuring Optimization Power - Less Wrong

14 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 27 October 2008 09:44PM

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

Comments (33)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: David3 28 October 2008 01:04:51PM 1 point [-]

What I would suggest to begin with (besides any further technical problems) is that optimization power has to be defined relative to a given space or a given class of spaces (in addition to relative to a preference ordering and a random selection)

This allows comparisons between optimizers with a common target space to be more meaningful. In my example above, the hill climber would be less powerful than the range climber because given a "mountain range" the former would be stuck on a local maximum. So for both these optimizers, we would define the target space as the class of NxN topographies, and the range climber's score would be higher, as an average.

Comment author: timtyler 30 December 2011 01:39:38PM 0 points [-]

optimization power has to be defined relative to a given space or a given class of spaces

It's possible to do that fairly neatly and generally - using a Solomonoff prior with a "simple" reference machine.