On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Abhijeet Sinha wrote:
> Now in the next description, it is proposed that the vacuum-cleaner
> agent would be wasting energy if it is allowed to move to the other
> square if both the squares are clean. So very rightly the performance
> measure deducts one point for moving into a clean square.
I interpreted the question a bit differently. I saw no indication that the
performance award of one point for being on a clean square would go away.
The phrase "if the performance measure includes a penalty of one point for
each movement" seems to indicate that this change is "included" with the
previously stated performance measure of "one point for each clean square
at each time step".
This would mean that the agent would be awarded a point for being on a
clean square and then lose it when it wastes energy going to another clean
square. The performance measure score would always be zero.
> So having one more assumption makes out earlier agent ir-rational.
I concur because the spirit of the question seems to indicate that the
penalty performance measure does not work in tandem with the original
performance measure. I hope the wording can be reconsidered in the third
Just for fun... based on my reasoning above, wouldn't you agree that since
the score would always be zero no matter what, the agent would be
rational? Clearly it would have maximized its score.