So...noise can be useful in decision theory as long as you don’t expect it to do any work. And the mistake gets easier to make the more complex your system. Sounds right enough to me.
[nitpick]
Your ‘by definition’ link needs a look, Eliezer.
Or imagine that the combination changes every second. In this case, 0-0-0-0, 0-0-0-0 is just as good as the randomized algorithm—no better and no worse.
If it changes every second, trying the same set of four over and over is marginally better than random.
If you’ve just entered 0-0-0-0 and got it wrong, then on the next try every sequence except 0-0-0-0 has a small chance of being the correct sequence from the previous, and hence is incorrect this try.
Anyone care to work out exactly how much better off 0-0-0-0 is than a random set in this case?
So...noise can be useful in decision theory as long as you don’t expect it to do any work. And the mistake gets easier to make the more complex your system. Sounds right enough to me.
[nitpick]
Your ‘by definition’ link needs a look, Eliezer.
Or imagine that the combination changes every second. In this case, 0-0-0-0, 0-0-0-0 is just as good as the randomized algorithm—no better and no worse.
If it changes every second, trying the same set of four over and over is marginally better than random.
If you’ve just entered 0-0-0-0 and got it wrong, then on the next try every sequence except 0-0-0-0 has a small chance of being the correct sequence from the previous, and hence is incorrect this try.
Anyone care to work out exactly how much better off 0-0-0-0 is than a random set in this case?
[/nitpick]