Intelligent Agent Foundations Forumsign up / log in
Ontology, lost purposes, and instrumental goals
discussion post by Stuart Armstrong 424 days ago | discuss

A putative new idea for AI control; index here.

An underdefined idea connected with the challenge of getting an AI to safely move a strawberry onto a plate.

Now, specifying something in the physical world like that is a great challenge; you have to define ontologies and similar. But imagine that the AI had a goal – any goal – and that it had to program a subagent to protect itself while it was accomplishing that goal.

Then the subagent will certainly be programmed with a firm grasp of the physical world, and some decent bridging laws should it have an ontology change (if, for instance, quantum mechanics turns out to be incomplete).

This is just an illustration of a general fact: even if its goal is not properly grounded, the instrumental goals will include strongly grounded goals, resilient to ontology change.

This feels related to the fact that even AI’s that are given goals in badly programmed natural language concepts (“Make humans* happy*“, with the asterix denoting the poor grounding) will still need well-grounded concepts for”human“, just to function.

So, is there a way to exploit this instrumental ideal? To somehow set human* equal to human in the motivation? I’m not sure, but it seems there might be something possible there… Will think more.





NEW LINKS

NEW POSTS

NEW DISCUSSION POSTS

RECENT COMMENTS

[Delegative Reinforcement
by Vadim Kosoy on Stable Pointers to Value II: Environmental Goals | 1 like

Intermediate update: The
by Alex Appel on Further Progress on a Bayesian Version of Logical ... | 0 likes

Since Briggs [1] shows that
by 258 on In memoryless Cartesian environments, every UDT po... | 2 likes

This doesn't quite work. The
by Nisan Stiennon on Logical counterfactuals and differential privacy | 0 likes

I at first didn't understand
by Sam Eisenstat on An Untrollable Mathematician | 1 like

This is somewhat related to
by Vadim Kosoy on The set of Logical Inductors is not Convex | 0 likes

This uses logical inductors
by Abram Demski on The set of Logical Inductors is not Convex | 0 likes

Nice writeup. Is one-boxing
by Tom Everitt on Smoking Lesion Steelman II | 0 likes

Hi Alex! The definition of
by Vadim Kosoy on Delegative Inverse Reinforcement Learning | 0 likes

A summary that might be
by Alex Appel on Delegative Inverse Reinforcement Learning | 1 like

I don't believe that
by Alex Appel on Delegative Inverse Reinforcement Learning | 0 likes

This is exactly the sort of
by Stuart Armstrong on Being legible to other agents by committing to usi... | 0 likes

When considering an embedder
by Jack Gallagher on Where does ADT Go Wrong? | 0 likes

The differences between this
by Abram Demski on Policy Selection Solves Most Problems | 1 like

Looking "at the very
by Abram Demski on Policy Selection Solves Most Problems | 0 likes

RSS

Privacy & Terms