Solomonoff Induction is not well-defined because it is either incomputable and/or absurdly irrelevant. This is where the communication breaks down. I have no idea why you would make a remark like that. It is interesting that you are an incremental-progress guy.
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Abram Demski <[email protected]>wrote: > Jim, > > > Saying that something "approximates Solomonoff Induction" doesn't have any >> meaning since we don't know what Solomonoff Induction actually >> represents. And does talk about the "full program space," merit mentioning? >> > > I'm not sure what you mean here; Solomonoff induction and the full program > space both seem like well-defined concepts to me. > > > I think we both believe that there must be some major breakthrough in >> computational theory waiting to be discovered, but I don't see how >> that could be based on anything other than Boolean Satisfiability. > > > A polynom SAT would certainly be a major breakthrough for AI and > computation generally; and if the brain utilizes something like such an > algorithm, then AGI could almost certainly never get off the ground without > it. > > However, I'm far from saying there must be a breakthrough coming in this > area, and I don't have any other areas in mind. I'm more of an > incremental-progress type guy. :) IMHO, what the field needs to advance is > for more people to recognize the importance of relational methods (as you > put it I think, the importance of structure). > > --Abram > > On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Well I guess I misunderstood what you said. >> But, you did say, >> "The question of whether the function would be useful for the "sorts of >> things we keep talking about" ... well, I think the best argument that I can >> give is that MDL is strongly supported by both theory and practice for many >> *subsets* of the full program space. The concern might be that, so far, it >> is only supported by *theory* for the full program space-- and since >> approximations have very bad error-bound properties, it may never be >> supported in practice. My reply to this would be that it still appears >> useful to approximate Solomonoff induction, since most successful predictors >> can be viewed as approximations to Solomonoff induction. "It approximates >> solomonoff induction" appears to be a good _explanation_ for the success of >> many systems." >> >> Saying that something "approximates Solomonoff Induction" doesn't have any >> meaning since we don't know what Solomonoff Induction actually >> represents. And does talk about the "full program space," merit mentioning? >> >> I can see how some of the kinds of things that you have talked about (to >> use my own phrase in order to avoid having to list all the kinds of claims >> that I think have been made about this subject) could be produced from >> finite sets, but I don't understand why you think they are important. >> >> I think we both believe that there must be some major breakthrough in >> computational theory waiting to be discovered, but I don't see how >> that could be based on anything other than Boolean Satisfiability. >> >> Can you give me a simple example and explanation of the kind of thing you >> have in mind, and why you think it is important? >> >> Jim Bromer >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Abram Demski <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Jim, >>> >>> The statements about bounds are mathematically provable... furthermore, I >>> was just agreeing with what you said, and pointing out that the statement >>> could be proven. So what is your issue? I am confused at your response. Is >>> it because I didn't include the proofs in my email? >>> >>> --Abram >>> >> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com/> >> > > > > -- > Abram Demski > http://lo-tho.blogspot.com/ > http://groups.google.com/group/one-logic > *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <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=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
