On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 5:38 AM, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- On Tue, 10/14/08, Terren Suydam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Matt, >> >> Your measure of intelligence seems to be based on not much >> more than storage capacity, processing power, I/O, and >> accumulated knowledge. This has the advantage of being >> easily formalizable, but has the disadvantage of missing a >> necessary aspect of intelligence. > > Usually when I say "intelligence" I mean "amount of knowledge", which can > be measured in bits. (Well not really, since Kolmogorov complexity is not > computable). The other measures reduce to it. Increasing memory allows more > knowledge to be stored. Increasing processing power and I/O bandwidth allows > faster learning, or more knowledge accumulation over the same time period. > > Actually, amount of knowledge is just an upper bound. A random string has > high algorithmic complexity but is not intelligent in any meaningful sense. My > justification for this measure is based on the AIXI model. In order for an > agent > to guess an environment with algorithmic complexity K, the agent must be able > to simulate the environment, so it must also have algorithmic complexity K. An > agent with higher complexity can guess a superset of environments that a lower > complexity agent could, and therefore cannot do worse in accumulated reward. >
Interstellar void must be astronomically intelligent, with all its incompressible noise... -- Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://causalityrelay.wordpress.com/ ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
