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.

Stuart_Armstrong comments on Creating a satisficer - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 11 March 2015 03:03PM

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: Stuart_Armstrong 23 March 2015 03:01:05PM 0 points [-]

Do you disagree with my description of the "resource gathering agent": http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/luo/resource_gathering_and_precorriged_agents/

The point here is that M(u-v) might not know what v is, but M(εu+v) certainly does, and this is not the same as maximising an unknown utility function.

Comment author: Vaniver 23 March 2015 03:33:16PM 0 points [-]

The point here is that M(u-v) might not know what v is, but M(εu+v) certainly does, and this is not the same as maximising an unknown utility function.

Ah, okay. I think I see better what you're getting at. My intuition is that there's a mapping to minimization of a reasonable aggregation of the set of non-negative utilities, but I think I should actually work through some examples before I make any long comments.

Do you disagree with my description of the "resource gathering agent":

I don't think I had read that article until now, but no objections come to mind.

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 23 March 2015 03:35:36PM 0 points [-]

My intuition is that there's a mapping to minimization of a reasonable aggregation of the set of non-negative utilities

That would be useful to know, if you can find examples. Especially ones where all v and -v have the same probability (which is my current favourite requirement in this area).