analiza aiqbench
This paper proposes a rigorous mathematical framework defining value as information-theoretic efficiency in goal-directed agents, directly linking resource conversion rates to mutual information bounds. By validating these laws against live language models, it demonstrates that realized capability scales with perception bandwidth rather than parameter count alone, offering new metrics for alignment and waste detection. The work unifies concepts from generalized Kelly betting and classical control into a single theory applicable to scaling AI systems under constraints.
A Mathematical Theory of Value: a synthesis on goal-directed agency under resource constraints
arXiv:2606.12502v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We propose that value -- the quantity goal-directed agents create, destroy, and exchange -- is a lawful structural quantity in the same category as information. Following Shannon's method, we make one ruthless abstraction: value is the rate at which an agent converts a resource into goal-progress, relative to a frame fixed by its goal. A scale-invariance axiom forces a logarithmic measure, $V=\sum_i k_i \ln e_i$; compounding of a reinvested resource forces the same form via the ergodicity argument of Peters (2019). The two routes are kin rather than independent; their agreement is a consistency check, not an over-determination. We derive a coding theorem of value: $\Delta G \le I(X;Y)$, achieved by Bayes-proportional allocation; realized value decomposes as $G=D(q\|r)-D(q\|p)$, identifying misalignment with measurable waste. For populations, value is frame-relative while price is frame-independent; a fleet that pools its resource and fuses its perception inherits the ceiling $G_{\mathrm{fleet}} \le I(X;Y_{1:m}) \le H(X)$ (a corollary; an earlier sum-form claim was wrong and is corrected in v5). A dynamical layer yields an is/ought asymmetry from which alignment emerges as a control-stability condition with a closed-form residual. We test the single-frame laws on live language models in a pre-registered scale-up: perception mutual information tracks realized capability rather than parameter count (Spearman $\rho = 0.977$ pooled over 30 model$\times$domain points), out-of-sample $\Delta G$ tracks $I(X;Y)$, and over-confidence is measurable dissipation; a further pre-registered test shows the bridge is shape-invariant across four task shapes ($n=42$, slope 0.953). None of the mechanisms is individually new -- generalized Kelly, Armstrong & Mindermann (2018), classical control; the contribution is their unification and the governance mapping (incentive design over oversight) that follows.
Abstract:We propose that value -- the quantity goal-directed agents create, destroy, and exchange -- is a lawful structural quantity in the same category as information. Following Shannon's method, we make one ruthless abstraction: value is the rate at which an agent converts a resource into goal-progress, relative to a frame fixed by its goal. A scale-invariance axiom forces a logarithmic measure, $V=\sum_i k_i \ln e_i$; compounding of a reinvested resource forces the same form via the ergodicity argument of Peters (2019). The two routes are kin rather than independent; their agreement is a consistency check, not an over-determination. We derive a coding theorem of value: $\Delta G \le I(X;Y)$, achieved by Bayes-proportional allocation; realized value decomposes as $G=D(q\|r)-D(q\|p)$, identifying misalignment with measurable waste. For populations, value is frame-relative while price is frame-independent; a fleet that pools its resource and fuses its perception inherits the ceiling $G_{\mathrm{fleet}} \le I(X;Y_{1:m}) \le H(X)$ (a corollary; an earlier sum-form claim was wrong and is corrected in v5). A dynamical layer yields an is/ought asymmetry from which alignment emerges as a control-stability condition with a closed-form residual. We test the single-frame laws on live language models in a pre-registered scale-up: perception mutual information tracks realized capability rather than parameter count (Spearman $\rho = 0.977$ pooled over 30 model$\times$domain points), out-of-sample $\Delta G$ tracks $I(X;Y)$, and over-confidence is measurable dissipation; a further pre-registered test shows the bridge is shape-invariant across four task shapes ($n=42$, slope 0.953). None of the mechanisms is individually new -- generalized Kelly, Armstrong & Mindermann (2018), classical control; the contribution is their unification and the governance mapping (incentive design over oversight) that follows.
Physics and Society (physics.soc-ph); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2606.12502 [physics.soc-ph]
(or arXiv:2606.12502v1 [physics.soc-ph] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.12502 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 369 cuvinte