So, I take it that Savage’s theorem is a representation theorem under your schema?
Yes. Arguably it is also a coherence theorem, the two are not mutually exclusive, but it’s more unambiguously a representation theorem.
Theoretically or practically? I.e. you can’t derive an exploitability result easily from a parto suboptimality?
Practically. Consider e.g. applying coherence tools to an e coli. That thing is not capable of signing arbitrary contracts or meaningfully choosing between arbitrary trades, and insofar as it’s wasting resources those resources likely end up e.g. as waste heat. For another agent to “eat up” the wasted resources, it would need to e.g. restructure the e coli’s metabolic pathways; it’s not really something which can happen via things-which-look-like-trading-with-an-agent.
Arguably, evolutionary pressures driving E coli to reduce waste come from other agents exploiting e coli’s wastefulness. At least in part. Admittedly, that’s not the only thing making it hard for e coli to reproduce while being wasteful. But the upshot is that exploiting/arbitraging away predictable loss of resources may drive coherence across iterations of an agent design instead of within one design. Which is useful to note, though I admit that this comment kinda feels like a cope for the frame that exploitability is logically downstream of coherence.
Yes. Arguably it is also a coherence theorem, the two are not mutually exclusive, but it’s more unambiguously a representation theorem.
Practically. Consider e.g. applying coherence tools to an e coli. That thing is not capable of signing arbitrary contracts or meaningfully choosing between arbitrary trades, and insofar as it’s wasting resources those resources likely end up e.g. as waste heat. For another agent to “eat up” the wasted resources, it would need to e.g. restructure the e coli’s metabolic pathways; it’s not really something which can happen via things-which-look-like-trading-with-an-agent.
Arguably, evolutionary pressures driving E coli to reduce waste come from other agents exploiting e coli’s wastefulness. At least in part. Admittedly, that’s not the only thing making it hard for e coli to reproduce while being wasteful. But the upshot is that exploiting/arbitraging away predictable loss of resources may drive coherence across iterations of an agent design instead of within one design. Which is useful to note, though I admit that this comment kinda feels like a cope for the frame that exploitability is logically downstream of coherence.