Computer scientists have provided a distinct justification of Occam’s Razor. Using the probably approximately correct framework, they provide a theorem that they claim demonstrates that we should favor simpler hypotheses. The argument relies on a philosophical interpretation of the theorem. I argue that the standard interpretation of the result in the literature is misguided and that a better reading does not, in fact, support Occam’s Razor at all. To this end, I state and prove a very similar theorem that, if interpreted the same way, would justify the contradictory Anti-Occam’s Razor—the principle that we should favor more complex hypotheses.

中文翻译：

---

PAC 学习和奥卡姆剃刀：可能大约不正确

计算机科学家为奥卡姆剃刀提供了明确的理由。使用可能近似正确的框架，他们提供了一个定理，他们声称证明我们应该支持更简单的假设。该论证依赖于对该定理的哲学解释。我认为文献中对结果的标准解释是错误的，更好的阅读实际上根本不支持奥卡姆剃刀。为此，我陈述并证明一个非常相似的定理，如果以同样的方式解释，将证明矛盾的反奥卡姆剃刀原则——我们应该支持更复杂的假设的原则。