hm. I’m still a bit shaky on the definition of modal agent...does the following qualify?
IF(opponentcooperates with me AND I defect is a possible outcome){defect}
else{ if (opponent cooperates IFF i cooperate) (cooperate){else defect}
(edit: my comment about perfect unfair bots may have been based on the wrong generalizations from an infinite-case).
addendum: if what I’ve got doesn’t qualify as a model agent I’ll shut up until I understand enough to inspect the proof directly.
What do you even mean by “is a possible outcome” here? Do you mean that there is no proof in PA of the negation of the proposition?
The formula of a modal agent must be fully modalized, which means that all propositions containing references to actions of agents within the formula must be within the scope of a provability operator.
hm. I’m still a bit shaky on the definition of modal agent...does the following qualify?
IF(opponentcooperates with me AND I defect is a possible outcome){defect} else{ if (opponent cooperates IFF i cooperate) (cooperate){else defect}
(edit: my comment about perfect unfair bots may have been based on the wrong generalizations from an infinite-case). addendum: if what I’ve got doesn’t qualify as a model agent I’ll shut up until I understand enough to inspect the proof directly.
addendum 2: well. alright then I’ll shut up.
What do you even mean by “is a possible outcome” here? Do you mean that there is no proof in PA of the negation of the proposition?
The formula of a modal agent must be fully modalized, which means that all propositions containing references to actions of agents within the formula must be within the scope of a provability operator.