A Theory of Bounded Inductive Rationality

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.05068v1
• Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:13:29 GMT
• Title: A Theory of Bounded Inductive Rationality
• Authors: Caspar Oesterheld (Carnegie Mellon University), Abram Demski (Machine Intelligence Research Institute), Vincent Conitzer (Carnegie Mellon University)
• Abstract summary: We develop a theory of rational decision making that does not assume logical omniscience. We consider agents who repeatedly face decision problems, including ones like betting on digits of pi. We prove that agents that are rational in this sense have other desirable properties.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The dominant theories of rational choice assume logical omniscience. That is, they assume that when facing a decision problem, an agent can perform all relevant computations and determine the truth value of all relevant logical/mathematical claims. This assumption is unrealistic when, for example, we offer bets on remote digits of pi or when an agent faces a computationally intractable planning problem. Furthermore, the assumption of logical omniscience creates contradictions in cases where the environment can contain descriptions of the agent itself. Importantly, strategic interactions as studied in game theory are decision problems in which a rational agent is predicted by its environment (the other players). In this paper, we develop a theory of rational decision making that does not assume logical omniscience. We consider agents who repeatedly face decision problems (including ones like betting on digits of pi or games against other agents). The main contribution of this paper is to provide a sensible theory of rationality for such agents. Roughly, we require that a boundedly rational inductive agent tests each efficiently computable hypothesis infinitely often and follows those hypotheses that keep their promises of high rewards. We then prove that agents that are rational in this sense have other desirable properties. For example, they learn to value random and pseudo-random lotteries at their expected reward. Finally, we consider strategic interactions between different agents and prove a folk theorem for what strategies bounded rational inductive agents can converge to.

Related papers

• Will AI Trade? A Computational Inversion of the No-Trade Theorem [12.50922986368726]
  Classic no-trade theorems attribute trade to heterogeneous beliefs.<n>We re-examine this conclusion for AI agents, asking if trade can arise from computational limitations.<n>Our results suggest that the inherent computational limitations of AI agents can lead to situations where equilibrium is not reached.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-17T03:55:58Z)
• Embedded Universal Predictive Intelligence: a coherent framework for multi-agent learning [57.23345786304694]
  We introduce a framework for prospective learning and embedded agency centered on self-prediction.<n>We show that in multi-agent settings, self-prediction enables agents to reason about others running similar algorithms.<n>We extend the theory of AIXI, and study universally intelligent embedded agents which start from a Solomonoff prior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-27T08:46:48Z)
• Real-Time Reasoning Agents in Evolving Environments [52.21796134114843]
  We introduce real-time reasoning as a new problem formulation for agents in evolving environments.<n>Our work establishes real-time reasoning as a critical testbed for developing practical agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-07T00:51:02Z)
• Toward a Theory of Agents as Tool-Use Decision-Makers [89.26889709510242]
  We argue that true autonomy requires agents to be grounded in a coherent epistemic framework that governs what they know, what they need to know, and how to acquire that knowledge efficiently.<n>We propose a unified theory that treats internal reasoning and external actions as equivalent epistemic tools, enabling agents to systematically coordinate introspection and interaction.<n>This perspective shifts the design of agents from mere action executors to knowledge-driven intelligence systems, offering a principled path toward building foundation agents capable of adaptive, efficient, and goal-directed behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-01T07:52:16Z)
• FAIRGAME: a Framework for AI Agents Bias Recognition using Game Theory [51.96049148869987]
  We present FAIRGAME, a Framework for AI Agents Bias Recognition using Game Theory. We describe its implementation and usage, and we employ it to uncover biased outcomes in popular games among AI agents. Overall, FAIRGAME allows users to reliably and easily simulate their desired games and scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-19T15:29:04Z)
• Hypothesis-Driven Theory-of-Mind Reasoning for Large Language Models [76.6028674686018]
  We introduce thought-tracing, an inference-time reasoning algorithm to trace the mental states of agents. Our algorithm is modeled after the Bayesian theory-of-mind framework. We evaluate thought-tracing on diverse theory-of-mind benchmarks, demonstrating significant performance improvements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T15:08:50Z)
• How Ambiguous are the Rationales for Natural Language Reasoning? A Simple Approach to Handling Rationale Uncertainty [0.0]
  Rationales behind answers not only explain model decisions but boost language models to reason well on complex reasoning tasks. It is non-trivial to estimate the degree to which the rationales are faithful enough to encourage model performance. We propose how to deal with imperfect rationales causing aleatoric uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-22T07:12:34Z)
• (Ir)rationality in AI: State of the Art, Research Challenges and Open Questions [2.9008806248012333]
  The concept of rationality is central to the field of artificial intelligence. There is no unified definition of what constitutes a rational agent. We consider irrational behaviours that can prove to be optimal in certain scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-28T19:01:09Z)
• Decision-Making Among Bounded Rational Agents [5.24482648010213]
  We introduce the concept of bounded rationality from an information-theoretic view into the game-theoretic framework. This allows the robots to reason other agents' sub-optimal behaviors and act accordingly under their computational constraints. We demonstrate that the resulting framework allows the robots to reason about different levels of rational behaviors of other agents and compute a reasonable strategy under its computational constraint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-17T00:29:24Z)
• Rationality in current era -- A recent survey [0.0]
  The paper attempts to put forward a recent survey (last five years) of research on divergent views on rationality. The first school is sceptical of progress of AI and believes that human intelligencewill always supersede machine intelligence. The second school thinks that advent of AI and advances in computing will help in better understanding of bounded rationality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-27T12:09:41Z)
• Logical Credal Networks [87.25387518070411]
  This paper introduces Logical Credal Networks, an expressive probabilistic logic that generalizes many prior models that combine logic and probability. We investigate its performance on maximum a posteriori inference tasks, including solving Mastermind games with uncertainty and detecting credit card fraud.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-25T00:00:47Z)
• CausalCity: Complex Simulations with Agency for Causal Discovery and Reasoning [68.74447489372037]
  We present a high-fidelity simulation environment that is designed for developing algorithms for causal discovery and counterfactual reasoning. A core component of our work is to introduce textitagency, such that it is simple to define and create complex scenarios. We perform experiments with three state-of-the-art methods to create baselines and highlight the affordances of this environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-25T00:21:41Z)
• Argumentation-based Agents that Explain their Decisions [0.0]
  We focus on how an extended model of BDI (Beliefs-Desires-Intentions) agents can be able to generate explanations about their reasoning. Our proposal is based on argumentation theory, we use arguments to represent the reasons that lead an agent to make a decision. We propose two types of explanations: the partial one and the complete one.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-13T02:08:10Z)
• Modelling Multi-Agent Epistemic Planning in ASP [66.76082318001976]
  This paper presents an implementation of a multi-shot Answer Set Programming-based planner that can reason in multi-agent epistemic settings. The paper shows how the planner, exploiting an ad-hoc epistemic state representation and the efficiency of ASP solvers, has competitive performance results on benchmarks collected from the literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-07T06:35:56Z)
• Empirically Verifying Hypotheses Using Reinforcement Learning [58.09414653169534]
  This paper formulates hypothesis verification as an RL problem. We aim to build an agent that, given a hypothesis about the dynamics of the world, can take actions to generate observations which can help predict whether the hypothesis is true or false.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-29T01:01:10Z)
• Logical Neural Networks [51.46602187496816]
  We propose a novel framework seamlessly providing key properties of both neural nets (learning) and symbolic logic (knowledge and reasoning) Every neuron has a meaning as a component of a formula in a weighted real-valued logic, yielding a highly intepretable disentangled representation. Inference is omni rather than focused on predefined target variables, and corresponds to logical reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-23T16:55:45Z)
• Bistable Probabilities: A Unified Framework for Studying Rationality and Irrationality in Classical and Quantum Games [0.8924669503280334]
  Bistable probabilities are proposed as a principled and straight forward means for modeling irrational decision making in games. It was found that up to three Nash equilibria exist for all three classical bistable games and maximal utility was attained when agents were rational. Up to three Nash equilibria exist for all three quantum bistable games, however, utility was shown to increase according to higher levels of agent irrationality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-04T12:41:39Z)
• Invariant Rationalization [84.1861516092232]
  A typical rationalization criterion, i.e. maximum mutual information (MMI), finds the rationale that maximizes the prediction performance based only on the rationale. We introduce a game-theoretic invariant rationalization criterion where the rationales are constrained to enable the same predictor to be optimal across different environments. We show both theoretically and empirically that the proposed rationales can rule out spurious correlations, generalize better to different test scenarios, and align better with human judgments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-22T00:50:27Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.