4 ms·
Maybe even _that_ reasoning relies upon simple hypotheses being more likely. In this case, the simple, and therefore favoured, hypothesis would be that "models
by Bromskloss 9y ago
Maybe even _that_ reasoning relies upon simple hypotheses being more likely. In this case, the simple, and therefore favoured, hypothesis would be that "models with a simplicity that is similar to that of other successful models are more likely to be true".
- lmm 9y agoThat sounds like a more complex hypothesis to me.
- Bromskloss 9y agoMaybe it's simpler than "models with a simplicity that is dissimilar to that of other successful models are more likely to be true", though it's not obvious what should be considered simple and not.
- lmm 9y agoKolgomorov complexity seems like the obviously correct measure, though AIUI it's only defined relative to some fixed Turing machine. I have an idea of doing a PageRank-style weighting of Turing machines, based on how simple/complex simulating one under another is. That would align with my intuition that most basic universal Turing machines are equally valid, but one that has (say) a short instruction that outputs one particular long sequence of symbols is probably not a valid machine to use.
- balabaster 9y agoAssuming that other successful models are also true and not just a wolf in sheep's clothing.
- Bromskloss 9y agoLet's forget that I said "true", and switch it to "successful" instead.