Hutter proved (3), although as a general principle it was already a well
established practice in machine learning. Also, I agree with (4) but this
is not the primary reason to prefer simplicity.
Hutter *defined* the measure of correctness using simplicity as a component.
Of course, they're correlated when you do such a thing. That's not a proof,
that's an assumption.
Regarding (4), I was deliberately ambiguous as to whether I meant
implementation of "thinking" system or implementation of thought itself.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Mahoney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <agi@v2.listbox.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 11:11 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Occam's Razor and its abuse
--- On Wed, 10/29/08, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (1) Simplicity (in conclusions, hypothesis, theories,
> etc.) is preferred.
> (2) The preference to simplicity does not need a
> reason or justification.
> (3) Simplicity is preferred because it is correlated
> with correctness.
> I agree with (1), but not (2) and (3).
I concur but would add that (4) Simplicity is preferred
because it is
correlated with correctness *of implementation* (or ease of
implementation correctly :-)
Occam said (1) but had no proof. Hutter proved (3), although as a general
principle it was already a well established practice in machine learning.
Also, I agree with (4) but this is not the primary reason to prefer
simplicity.
-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------
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/?&;
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.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
