As a clarification, I’m considering the case where we consider the state space to be the set of all “possible” histories (including counter-logical ones), like the standard “general RL” (i.e. AIXI-style) set-up.
Well, maybe I didn’t do a good job understanding your question :)
Decision procedures that don’t return an answer, or that fail to halt, for some of the “possible” histories, seem like a pretty broad category. Ditto for decision procedures that always have an answer.
But I guess a lot of those decision procedures are boring or dumb. So maybe you were thinking about a question like “for sufficiently ‘good’ decision theories, do they all end up specifying responses for all counter-logical histories, or do they leave free parameters?”
I don’t understand how this answers the question.
As a clarification, I’m considering the case where we consider the state space to be the set of all “possible” histories (including counter-logical ones), like the standard “general RL” (i.e. AIXI-style) set-up.
Well, maybe I didn’t do a good job understanding your question :)
Decision procedures that don’t return an answer, or that fail to halt, for some of the “possible” histories, seem like a pretty broad category. Ditto for decision procedures that always have an answer.
But I guess a lot of those decision procedures are boring or dumb. So maybe you were thinking about a question like “for sufficiently ‘good’ decision theories, do they all end up specifying responses for all counter-logical histories, or do they leave free parameters?”
Am I on the right track?