Intelligent Agent Foundations Forumsign up / log in
Logical Induction with incomputable sequences
post by Alex Mennen 310 days ago | Abram Demski, Paul Christiano and Scott Garrabrant like this | discuss

In the definition of a logical inductor, the deductive process is required to be computable. This, of course, does not allow the logical inductor to use randomness, or predict uncomputable sequences. The way traders were defined in the logical induction paper, this was necessary, because the traders were not given access to the output of the deductive process.

To fix this, a trading strategy for day \(n\) should be redefined as a function that takes in the output of the deductive process on day \(n-1\) as its input, and outputs what the logical induction paper defines as a trading strategy for day \(n\); that is, an affine combination of the form \(c+\xi_{1}\phi_{1}+...+\xi_{k}\phi_{k}\), where \(\phi_{1},...,\phi_{k}\) are sentences, \(\xi_{1},...,\xi_{k}\) are expressible features of rank \(\leq n\), and \(c=-\sum_{i}\xi_{i}\phi_{i}^{*n}\). A trader is a function which takes in \(n\) and outputs a trading strategy for day \(n\). By Currying, a trader can be seen as a function that takes in a number \(n\) and a list of sentences given by the deductive process, and outputs an expressible feature combination as above. We can say that a trader is efficiently computable if this function is computable in time polynomial in \(n\) plus the total length of the sentences output by the deductive process. The definition of exploitation would be modified in the natural way, and there is also a natural way to modify the logical induction algorithm, which will satisfy the logical induction criterion.

As an example, suppose a logical inductor is given access to a sensor that regularly produces bits based on what it observes in the environment. We can represent the data from the sensor with an additional unary predicate \(S\) that we add to the language, such that \(S\left(n\right)\) is true iff the \(n\)th bit provided by the sensor is a \(1\) (this assumes that we’re working in a theory that can interpret arithmetic, so that ``\(n\)’’ can be expressed in the language). The deductive process should output \(S\left(n\right)\) or \(\neg S\left(n\right)\) on day \(n\) (and also can output consequences that it can deduce from the values of the bits it has seen so far). Or, if the logical inductor gets access to more empirical information or random bits as time goes on, there could be an increasing function \(f\) such that the deductive process outputs the truth values of \(S\left(f\left(n\right)\right),...,S\left(f\left(n+1\right)-1\right)\) on day \(n\). Note that in this situation, the deductive process is computable as a function of the bitstream given by the sensor, so the traders may as well take in as input only the bits from the sensor that the deductive process has seen by day \(n-1\), rather than every sentence produced by the deductive process.

This seems to be similar to what Vadim was doing in section 3 of this paper, except that that paper moved to a continuous setting, did not deal with computability, and abandoned predicting theorems as a goal.



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