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.

gedymin comments on An additional problem with Solomonoff induction - Less Wrong Discussion

2 Post author: gedymin 22 January 2014 11:34PM

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

Comments (51)

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

Comment author: gedymin 26 January 2014 07:16:25PM 0 points [-]

You mean "also two programs of length l+1", right?

I think this comment by gjm addresses the "longer programs are as likely" idea: http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/jhm/understanding_and_justifying_solomonoff_induction/adfc

Comment author: private_messaging 26 January 2014 10:56:20PM *  0 points [-]

Yeah, that was a typo.

There's entirely too many ways to formalize S.I. which are basically equivalent, which makes it really difficult to discuss. I standardize on "random bits on a read-only input tape, write only output tape, and a single work tape initialized with zeroes" model, with the probability of a specific output string s being the prior for s . The machine M must be such that for any other machine M' you can make a prefix such that putting that prefix on the beginning of the tape for M makes it exactly equivalent to M' . (the prefix works as an emulator, i.e. a program for the machine M', with this prefix, will run on M exactly as if it was M'). Very concise description, and you can get all the things like 2^-l out of that.