IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1803.04585.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Categorizing Variants of Goodhart's Law

Author

Listed:
  • David Manheim
  • Scott Garrabrant

Abstract

There are several distinct failure modes for overoptimization of systems on the basis of metrics. This occurs when a metric which can be used to improve a system is used to an extent that further optimization is ineffective or harmful, and is sometimes termed Goodhart's Law. This class of failure is often poorly understood, partly because terminology for discussing them is ambiguous, and partly because discussion using this ambiguous terminology ignores distinctions between different failure modes of this general type. This paper expands on an earlier discussion by Garrabrant, which notes there are "(at least) four different mechanisms" that relate to Goodhart's Law. This paper is intended to explore these mechanisms further, and specify more clearly how they occur. This discussion should be helpful in better understanding these types of failures in economic regulation, in public policy, in machine learning, and in Artificial Intelligence alignment. The importance of Goodhart effects depends on the amount of power directed towards optimizing the proxy, and so the increased optimization power offered by artificial intelligence makes it especially critical for that field.

Suggested Citation

  • David Manheim & Scott Garrabrant, 2018. "Categorizing Variants of Goodhart's Law," Papers 1803.04585, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2019.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1803.04585
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.04585
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Oliver Braganza, 2019. "A simple model suggesting economically rational sample-size choice drives irreproducibility," Papers 1908.08702, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2020.
    2. Gai, Prasanna & Kemp, Malcolm & Sánchez Serrano, Antonio & Schnabel, Isabel, 2019. "Regulatory complexity and the quest for robust regulation," Report of the Advisory Scientific Committee 8, European Systemic Risk Board.
    3. Manheim, David, 2018. "Building Less Flawed Metrics," MPRA Paper 90649, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Nunn, Jack S & Shafee, Thomas, 2021. "Standardised Data on Initiatives – STARDIT: Beta Version," OSF Preprints w5xj6, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1803.04585. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.