Representation and Invariance in Reinforcement Learning
If we changed the rules, would the wise trade places with the fools? Different groups formalize reinforcement learning (RL) in different ways. If an agent in one RL formalization is to run within another RL formalization's environment, the agent must first be converted, or mapped. A criterion of adequacy for any such mapping is that it preserves relative intelligence. This paper investigates the formulation and properties of this criterion of adequacy. However, prior to the problem of formulation is, we argue, the problem of comparative intelligence. We compare intelligence using ultrafilters, motivated by viewing agents as candidates in intelligence elections where voters are environments. These comparators are counterintuitive, but we prove an impossibility theorem about RL intelligence measurement, suggesting such counterintuitions are unavoidable. Given a mapping between RL frameworks, we establish sufficient conditions to ensure that, for any ultrafilter-based intelligence comparator in the destination framework, there exists an ultrafilter-based intelligence comparator in the source framework such that the mapping preserves relative intelligence. We consider three concrete mappings between various RL frameworks and show that they satisfy these sufficient conditions and therefore preserve suitably-measured relative intelligence.