Intelligent Agent Foundations Forumsign up / log in
Indifference and compensatory rewards
discussion post by Stuart Armstrong 492 days ago | discuss

A putative new idea for AI control; index here.

It’s occurred to me that there is a framework where we can see all “indifference” results as corrective rewards, both for the utility function change indifference and for the policy change indifference.

Imagine that the agent has reward \(R_0\) and is following policy \(\pi_0\), and we want to change it to having reward \(R_1\) and following policy \(\pi_1\).

Then the corrective reward we need to pay it, so that it doesn’t attempt to resist or cause that change, is simply the difference between the two expected values:

  • \(V(R_0|\pi_0)-V(R_1|\pi_1)\),

where \(V\) is the agent’s own valuation of the expected reward, conditional on the policy.

This explains why off-policy reward-based agents are already safely interruptible: since we change the policy, not the reward, \(R_0=R_1\). And since off-policy agents have value estimates that are indifferent to the policy followed, \(V(R_0|\pi_0)=V(R_1|\pi_1)\), and the compensatory rewards are zero.



NEW LINKS

NEW POSTS

NEW DISCUSSION POSTS

RECENT COMMENTS

I found an improved version
by Alex Appel on A Loophole for Self-Applicative Soundness | 0 likes

I misunderstood your
by Sam Eisenstat on A Loophole for Self-Applicative Soundness | 0 likes

Caught a flaw with this
by Alex Appel on A Loophole for Self-Applicative Soundness | 0 likes

As you say, this isn't a
by Sam Eisenstat on A Loophole for Self-Applicative Soundness | 1 like

Note: I currently think that
by Jessica Taylor on Predicting HCH using expert advice | 0 likes

Counterfactual mugging
by Jessica Taylor on Doubts about Updatelessness | 0 likes

What do you mean by "in full
by David Krueger on Doubts about Updatelessness | 0 likes

It seems relatively plausible
by Paul Christiano on Maximally efficient agents will probably have an a... | 1 like

I think that in that case,
by Alex Appel on Smoking Lesion Steelman | 1 like

Two minor comments. First,
by Sam Eisenstat on No Constant Distribution Can be a Logical Inductor | 1 like

A: While that is a really
by Alex Appel on Musings on Exploration | 0 likes

> The true reason to do
by Jessica Taylor on Musings on Exploration | 0 likes

A few comments. Traps are
by Vadim Kosoy on Musings on Exploration | 1 like

I'm not convinced exploration
by Abram Demski on Musings on Exploration | 0 likes

Update: This isn't really an
by Alex Appel on A Difficulty With Density-Zero Exploration | 0 likes

RSS

Privacy & Terms