Reward learning summary post by Stuart Armstrong 379 days ago | discuss A putative new idea for AI control; index here. I’ve been posting a lot on value/reward learning recently, and, as usual, the process of posting (and some feedback) means that those posts are partially superseded already - and some of them are overly complex. So here I’ll try and briefly summarise my current insights, with links to the other posts if appropriate (a link will cover all the points noted since the previous link): I’m modelling humans as a pair $$(p, R)$$, where $$R$$ is the reward function, and $$p$$ is a planning algorithm (called a planer) that maps rewards to policies. An agent is trying to learn $$R$$. The policy of a given human is designated $$\pi_H$$. A pair $$(p, R)$$ is compatible if $$p(R)=\pi_H$$. There is a no-free-lunch theorem for these $$(p, R)$$ pairs. Once the agent has learnt $$\pi_H$$, it can get no further evidence from observing the human. At that point, any compatible pair $$(p, R)$$ is a valid candidate for explaining the human planner/reward. Thus the agent cannot get any idea about the reward without making assumptions about the human planner (ie the human irrationality) - and can’t get any idea about the planner without making assumptions about the human reward. Unlike most no-free-lunch theorems, a simplicity prior does not remove the result. LINK It’s even worse than that: a simplicity prior can push us away from any “reasonable” $$(p, R)$$. LINK Ignoring “noise” doesn’t improve the situation: the real problem is bias. LINK The $$(p, R)$$ formalism can also model situations like the agent “overriding” the human’s reward. LINK There are Pascal’s mugging type risks in modelling reward override, where a very unlikely $$(p, R)$$ pair may still be chosen because the expected reward for that choice is huge. LINK There is also the risk of an agent transforming human into rational maximisers of the reward its computed so far LINK. Humans are not just creatures with policies, but we are creatures with opinions and narratives about our own values emotions, and rationality. Using these “normative assumptions”, we can start converging on better $$(p, R)$$ pairs. LINK LINK Even given that, our values will remain underdefined, changeable, and open to manipulation. LINK Resolving those problems with our values is a process much more akin to defining values that discovering them. LINK There are important part of human values that are not easily captured in the $$(p, R)$$ formalism. LINK

### RECENT COMMENTS

[Note: This comment is three
 by Ryan Carey on A brief note on factoring out certain variables | 0 likes

There should be a chat icon
 by Alex Mennen on Meta: IAFF vs LessWrong | 0 likes

Apparently "You must be
 by Jessica Taylor on Meta: IAFF vs LessWrong | 1 like

There is a replacement for
 by Alex Mennen on Meta: IAFF vs LessWrong | 1 like

Regarding the physical
 by Vadim Kosoy on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

I think that we should expect
 by Vadim Kosoy on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

I think I understand your
 by Jessica Taylor on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

This seems like a hack. The
 by Jessica Taylor on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

After thinking some more,
 by Vadim Kosoy on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

Yes, I think that we're
 by Vadim Kosoy on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

My intuition is that it must
 by Vadim Kosoy on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

To first approximation, a
 by Vadim Kosoy on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

Actually, I *am* including
 by Vadim Kosoy on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

Yeah, when I went back and
 by Alex Appel on Optimal and Causal Counterfactual Worlds | 0 likes

> Well, we could give up on
 by Jessica Taylor on The Learning-Theoretic AI Alignment Research Agend... | 0 likes

Privacy & Terms