From: Denis (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Sep 15 2008 - 14:09:46 MDT
I think if "RSI" mean a program searching to improve its behaviour without using others data can be a good idea but it is very different to a "rewriting itself" program.
The "rewriting itsef" is a ill-definition and the only thing is possible to achieve in this way is a reduction on a costant C.
For example given an universal Turing machine accepting in input a program ( program without parameters) this turing machine executing the program can use new empty cells or rewrite a part or all the cells of the starting program.
If this program rewrite itself partially or totally by C cells the only advantage you can have is to use also this C cells in the elaboration.
There is not substantially difference from program and data.
The trick is that you can move the program in the costant C and this disappear asymptotically.
"Rewiting itself" is only an illusion.
A nice example is the Hanoy tower . In the recursive program solving this problem you can watch at the stack and you can think to it as a program with the istructions to move the stones and this programs change! The trick is that you are watching the wrong program!
--- On Sun, 9/14/08, Matt Mahoney <email@example.com> wrote:
> From: Matt Mahoney <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Subject: [sl4] A model of RSI
> To: "sl4" <email@example.com>
> Date: Sunday, September 14, 2008, 7:16 PM
> I have written a (rather trivial) recursively self improving
> program, along with a draft of a paper that tries to give a
> reasonable but rigorous definition of RSI. Any comments are
> -- Matt Mahoney, firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:03 MDT