Agents and Devices: A Relative Definition of Agency
read the original abstract
According to Dennett, the same system may be described using a `physical' (mechanical) explanatory stance, or using an `intentional' (belief- and goal-based) explanatory stance. Humans tend to find the physical stance more helpful for certain systems, such as planets orbiting a star, and the intentional stance for others, such as living animals. We define a formal counterpart of physical and intentional stances within computational theory: a description of a system as either a device, or an agent, with the key difference being that `devices' are directly described in terms of an input-output mapping, while `agents' are described in terms of the function they optimise. Bayes' rule can then be applied to calculate the subjective probability of a system being a device or an agent, based only on its behaviour. We illustrate this using the trajectories of an object in a toy grid-world domain.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Causal Foundations of Collective Agency
Collective agency arises when a group's joint actions are faithfully captured by a simpler causal model of unified rational behavior.
-
Modeling AGI Safety Frameworks with Causal Influence Diagrams
Models AGI safety frameworks with causal influence diagrams to compare optimization objectives and causal assumptions.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.