Samuel Alexander

2papers

2 Papers

AIDec 14, 2021
Representation and Invariance in Reinforcement Learning

Samuel Alexander, Arthur Paul Pedersen

Researchers have formalized reinforcement learning (RL) in different ways. If an agent in one RL framework is to run within another RL framework's environments, the agent must first be converted, or mapped, into that other framework. Whether or not this is possible depends on not only the RL frameworks in question and but also how intelligence itself is measured. In this paper, we lay foundations for studying relative-intelligence-preserving mappability between RL frameworks. We define two types of mappings, called weak and strong translations, between RL frameworks and prove that existence of these mappings enables two types of intelligence comparison according to the mappings preserving relative intelligence. We investigate the existence or lack thereof of these mappings between: (i) RL frameworks where agents go first and RL frameworks where environments go first; and (ii) twelve different RL frameworks differing in terms of whether or not agents or environments are required to be deterministic. In the former case, we consider various natural mappings between agent-first and environment-first RL and vice versa; we show some positive results (some such mappings are strong or weak translations) and some negative results (some such mappings are not). In the latter case, we completely characterize which of the twelve RL-framework pairs admit weak translations, under the assumption of integer-valued rewards and some additional mild assumptions.

AIJan 25, 2021
Measuring Intelligence and Growth Rate: Variations on Hibbard's Intelligence Measure

Samuel Alexander, Bill Hibbard

In 2011, Hibbard suggested an intelligence measure for agents who compete in an adversarial sequence prediction game. We argue that Hibbard's idea should actually be considered as two separate ideas: first, that the intelligence of such agents can be measured based on the growth rates of the runtimes of the competitors that they defeat; and second, one specific (somewhat arbitrary) method for measuring said growth rates. Whereas Hibbard's intelligence measure is based on the latter growth-rate-measuring method, we survey other methods for measuring function growth rates, and exhibit the resulting Hibbard-like intelligence measures and taxonomies. Of particular interest, we obtain intelligence taxonomies based on Big-O and Big-Theta notation systems, which taxonomies are novel in that they challenge conventional notions of what an intelligence measure should look like. We discuss how intelligence measurement of sequence predictors can indirectly serve as intelligence measurement for agents with Artificial General Intelligence (AGIs).