You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

RichardKennaway comments on Suggestions for naming a class of decision theories - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: orthonormal 17 March 2012 05:22PM

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

Comments (56)

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

Comment author: RichardKennaway 17 March 2012 11:33:36PM *  1 point [-]

Snap!

Most of the others just say "better" instead of saying what the desired sort of theory actually does.

Comment author: hairyfigment 18 March 2012 03:31:30AM 2 points [-]

Then what do we call decision theories capable of proving statements about self-modification?

Comment author: RichardKennaway 18 March 2012 08:19:40AM 0 points [-]

You could include them in reflexive decision theories. When formalised, I suspect there may not be much of a distinction between theories that can know about themselves and theories that can modify themselves.

Comment author: orthonormal 18 March 2012 04:05:30PM 1 point [-]

As a mathematician, I prefer using different notations for things until I've proved they're identical. And in this case, I rather suspect they're not.

Comment author: orthonormal 18 March 2012 04:14:21PM 0 points [-]

Most of the others just say "better" instead of saying what the desired sort of theory actually does.

Actually, it's precisely for this reason that "reflexive" doesn't work for what I originally wanted: I wanted to use a word to denote TDT, UDT, ADT, etc, not in terms of how they work but in terms of satisfying the five conditions, the most important of which is that they out-perform CDT. How a decision theory works is a secondary consideration to how well it works.