Jim Bromer wrote:
> Solomonoff Induction may require a trans-infinite level of complexity just to 
>run each program. 

"Trans-infinite" is not a mathematically defined term as far as I can tell. 
Maybe you mean larger than infinity, as in the infinite set of real numbers is 
larger than the infinite set of natural numbers (which is true).

But it is not true that Solomonoff induction requires more than aleph-null 
operations. (Aleph-null is the size of the set of natural numbers, the 
"smallest 
infinity"). An exact calculation requires that you test aleph-null programs for 
aleph-null time steps each. There are aleph-null programs because each program 
is a finite length string, and there is a 1 to 1 correspondence between the set 
of finite strings and N, the set of natural numbers. Also, each program 
requires 
aleph-null computation in the case that it runs forever, because each step in 
the infinite computation can be numbered 1, 2, 3...

However, the total amount of computation is still aleph-null because each step 
of each program can be described by an ordered pair (m,n) in N^2, meaning the 
n'th step of the m'th program, where m and n are natural numbers. The 
cardinality of N^2 is the same as the cardinality of N because there is a 1 to 
1 
correspondence between the sets. You can order the ordered pairs as (1,1), 
(1,2), (2,1), (1,3), (2,2), (3,1), (1,4), (2,3), (3,2), (4,1), (1,5), etc. 
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countable_set#More_formal_introduction

Furthermore you may approximate Solomonoff induction to any desired precision 
with finite computation. Simply interleave the execution of all programs as 
indicated in the ordering of ordered pairs that I just gave, where the programs 
are ordered from shortest to longest. Take the shortest program found so far 
that outputs your string, x. It is guaranteed that this algorithm will approach 
and eventually find the shortest program that outputs x given sufficient time, 
because this program exists and it halts.

In case you are wondering how Solomonoff induction is not computable, the 
problem is that after this algorithm finds the true shortest program that 
outputs x, it will keep running forever and you might still be wondering if a 
shorter program is forthcoming. In general you won't know.

 -- Matt Mahoney, matmaho...@yahoo.com




________________________________
From: Jim Bromer <jimbro...@gmail.com>
To: agi <agi@v2.listbox.com>
Sent: Sat, July 24, 2010 3:59:18 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] Comments On My Skepticism of Solomonoff Induction


Solomonoff Induction may require a trans-infinite level of complexity just to 
run each program.  Suppose each program is iterated through the enumeration of 
its instructions.  Then, not only do the infinity of possible programs need to 
be run, many combinations of the infinite programs from each simulated Turing 
Machine also have to be tried.  All the possible combinations of (accepted) 
programs, one from any two or more of the (accepted) programs produced by each 
simulated Turing Machine, have to be tried.  Although these combinations of 
programs from each of the simulated Turing Machine may not all be unique, they 
all have to be tried.  Since each simulated Turing Machine would produce 
infinite programs, I am pretty sure that this means that Solmonoff Induction 
is, 
by definition, trans-infinite.
Jim Bromer


On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Jim Bromer <jimbro...@gmail.com> wrote:

I have to retract my claim that the programs of Solomonoff Induction would be 
trans-infinite.  Each of the infinite individual programs could be enumerated 
by 
their individual instructions so some combination of unique individual programs 
would not correspond to a unique program but to the enumerated program that 
corresponds to the string of their individual instructions.  So I got that one 
wrong.
>Jim Bromer

agi | Archives  | Modify Your Subscription  


-------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to