I like Vanessa’s answer for the fact that it’s clearly NOT utility that is in the given payoff matrix. It’s not specified what it actually is, but the inclusion of a utility function that transforms the given outcomes into desirability (utility) for the players separates the concept enough to make sense. and then defining alignment as how well player A’s utility function supports player B’s game-outcome works. Not sure it’s useful, but it’s sensible.
How is it clearly not about utility being specified in the payoff matrix? Vanessa’s definition itself relies on utility, and both of us interchanged ‘payoff’ and ‘utility’ in the ensuing comments.
I like Vanessa’s answer for the fact that it’s clearly NOT utility that is in the given payoff matrix. It’s not specified what it actually is, but the inclusion of a utility function that transforms the given outcomes into desirability (utility) for the players separates the concept enough to make sense. and then defining alignment as how well player A’s utility function supports player B’s game-outcome works. Not sure it’s useful, but it’s sensible.
How is it clearly not about utility being specified in the payoff matrix? Vanessa’s definition itself relies on utility, and both of us interchanged ‘payoff’ and ‘utility’ in the ensuing comments.