mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Intervention Complexity as a Canonical Reward and a Measure of Intelligence

arXiv 2605.02175 ↗First posted 4 May 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The Legg--Hutter universal intelligence measure provides a rigorous scalar assessment of general intelligence as expected reward across all computable environments, weighted by simplicity. However, the measure presupposes an externally specified reward function, raising the question of whether the reward primitive is inherently arbitrary or whether a canonical choice exists. We propose a new measure, called intervention complexity, that has five natural properties: environment-derivedness, universality, minimality, sensitivity, and achievement preference. Given a resource function rho encoding an inductive bias (such as program length, execution time, or energy), rho-intervention complexity is a universal reward. The result yields a family of canonical rewards indexed by resource bias, providing a principled completion of the Legg--Hutter framework that does not require external normative input. We further propose a two-dimensional characterisation of intelligence: agent competence (how well the agent performs relative to the oracle optimum) and learning efficiency (how quickly this competence improves with experience). A separation theorem establishes that the choice of resource bias determines the computability of the resulting measure: action-count IC is computable in polynomial time, while program-length IC without oracle access is uncomputable, with the gap between oracle and bare IC precisely quantifying the information-theoretic content of learning. We discuss implications for superintelligence and for pre-training universal agents.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 May 2026.

Builds on

5 of 37 references.

References · 5

  1. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  2. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
  3. 2025Natural Emergent Misalignment from Reward Hacking in Production RLcited by 136
  4. 2019Reward Tampering Problems and Solutions in Reinforcement Learning: A Causal Influence Diagram Perspectivecited by 108
  5. 2021Intelligence and Unambitiousness Using Algorithmic Information Theorycited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.