理性代理人
在《人工智能：现代方法》一书中，Norvig 和 Russell 将理性主体定义如下：
理性主体：对于每个可能的感知序列，有一个理性主体考虑到感知序列提供的证据以及智能体拥有的任何内置知识，智能体应该选择一个有望最大化其性能指标的操作。
性能指标是我们希望代理执行的理想操作（由设计者固定和提供）。
我的问题是：给定一个智能体、一个性能指标、智能体周围的环境以及智能体能够执行的操作，我如何证明智能体是理性的？
我知道这是非常普遍的。我有书中的一个例子，但是，这是一项作业，我需要的只是指示。
谢谢你，
In the book "Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach", Norvig and Russell define a rational agent as follows:
Rational agent: for each possible percept sequence, a rational agent should select an action that is expected to maximize its performance measure, given the evidence provided by the percept sequence and whatever bult-in knowledge the agent has.
The performance measure is the desirable action that we want the agent to perform (fixed and provided by the designer).
My question is: given an agent, a performance measure, the environment surrounding the agent and the actions that the agent is capable of doing, how can I prove that the agent is rational?
I know this is very general. I have an example from the book, but, it's an assignment and all I need are directions.
Thank you,
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（2）
按照性能最高到性能最低的顺序列出代理能够执行的操作（与所需操作最兼容或最相似，或者为目标操作奠定基础......或者至少不会使其成为不可能或更少） -将来可能实现该操作）
您可以通过证明智能体尽可能采取所需的操作来证明智能体是理性的。
编辑：给定无限可能的决策，您可以检查 (a) 最后一个决策或 (b) 可能决策的 n 维空间中的随机点周围的区域；如果有一条通往“更高”点的“路径”，即更理性的行动，而你的代理人没有采取它，那么你的代理人就没有理性行事。如果没有这样的路径，或者如果有一条路径并且智能体“遵循”它，那么你的智能体可能不是全知和理性的，但根据它可以“看到”的决策，它正在理性地行动。
List the actions the agent is capable of in terms of most-performant to least-performant (most compatible with or most resembling the desirable action, or laying groundwork for the target action... or at the very least not making it impossible or less-likely to achieve that action in the future)
You can prove the agent is rational by showing that it takes the desirable actions whenever possible.
EDIT: Given infinite possible decisions, you can examine the area around (a) the last decision, or (b) a random point in the n-dimensional space of possible decisions; if there's a "path" to a "higher" point, i.e. a more-rational action, and your agent does not take it, your agent is not acting rationally. If there is no such path, or if there is a path and the agent "follows" it, well, your agent may not be omniscient and rational, but according to the decisions it can "see" it is acting rationally.
在我的论文中，我们使用了环境中（伪）随机对手的基线；如果我们的智能体通过重复实验能够在超过 50% 的时间内超越对手，我们就证明我们的智能体不是随机行动，而且比随机行动更好。 （检查一下你常用的统计工具，以确保结果可靠等等）
但我不知道这是否回答了理性的问题。我并没有真正考虑到这一点。但是，当智能体反复超出随机范围时，它必须刻意采取行动以改善其在环境中的状况。
然后，更强大的对手（本身就是理性的人工智能）提供了实际的性能基准。但理性代理人就意味着最优代理人吗？ （可能不会；除了一些棋盘游戏之外，几乎没有任何最佳代理）
但是，当你制作代理时，比随机更好的总是你想要的地方:)如果没有，它就不能被称为人工智能； ）
这至少是一个建议。如果数据得到正确的分析和解释，实验是一件很强大的事情。
In my thesis we used a baseline of a (pseudo) random opponent in the environment; if our agents could surpass the opponent more than 50% of the time through repeated experiments we had proven that our agents was not acting randomly, and was acting better than random. (Check up with your usual statistical tools to ensure reliable results et cetera)
But I do not know if that answers the question of being rational. I didn't really consider that point. But when it acts above random repeatedly, an agent must be acting deliberately to improve its situation in the environment.
Tougher opponents that are rational AI's in themselves then provides the actual benchmarks of performance. But does a rational agent mean an optimal agent? (Probably doesn't; there are hardly any optimal agents except for a few board games)
But better than random is always the place you want to be, when you're making an agent :) If not, it cannot be called AI ;)
It's a suggestion at least. Experimentation is a powerful thing, if the data is analysed and interpreted properly.