Ajay Garg 05005004Satadru Biswas

05005021Veeranna 05005023Praveen Lakhotia 05D05010Arun Karthikeyan 05D05020

Turing Test – SatadruWeak AI – Arun Strong AI – Veeranna AI Complete – Ajay Ethics of AI – Praveen

When ever we start something new we always start debating over the need for it, its feasibility.

Similar thing happened when AI was born in the early 1950’s.

Philosophers debated about very fundamental and important questions like – “Can machines think?”, “Is AI possible?” etc.

Turing then rephrased the question “Can machines think?” into a test, which became famous as The Turing Test.

Several Variants developed over the years.

Turing described a simple party game which involves three players. Player A is a man, Player B is a woman and Player C is a interrogator

The set up is such that Player C is unable to see either of A or B and can only communicate with them using written media

By asking questions of player A and player B, player C tries to determine which of the two is the man, and which of the two is the woman

A's role is to trick the interrogator into making the wrong decision, while player B attempts to assist the interrogator

Turing proposed that player A be replaced with a computer

The success of the computer is determined by comparing the outcome of the game when player A is a computer against the outcome when player A is a man

Or to put it in Turing’s words: “the interrogator decides wrongly as

often when the game is played [with the computer] as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman, then it can be argued that the computer is intelligent”

As with the Original Imitation Game Test, the role of player A is performed by a computer

The difference is that now the role of player B is to be performed by a man, rather than by a woman

In this version both player A (the computer) and player B are trying to trick the interrogator into making an incorrect decision

• A man can fail the OIG Test, but it is argued that this is a virtue of a test of intelligence if failure indicates a lack of resourcefulness

• It is argued that the OIG Test requires the resourcefulness associated with intelligence and not merely "simulation of human conversational behavior"

• The power of the Turing test derives from the fact that it is possible to talk about anything

• Turing wrote "the question and answer method seems to be suitable for introducing almost any one of the fields of human endeavor that we wish to include.“

• In order to pass a well designed Turing test, the machine would have to use natural language, to reason, to have knowledge and to learn

• It only tests if the subject resembles a human being

• It will fail to test for intelligence under two circumstances:

1.It tests for many behaviors that we may not consider intelligent, such as the susceptibility to insults or the temptation to lie.

2. It fails to capture the general properties of intelligence, such as the ability to solve difficult problems or come up with original insights.

Image Courtesy: Wikipedia Commons

CAN MACHINES ACT INTELLIGENTLY?

- ARUN

The assertion that machines could possibly act intelligently is called “weak AI” hypothesis by philosophers

Can machines act intelligently?Can machines think?

The argument from disabilityThe mathematical objectionThe argument from informality

“A machine can never do X”X according to Turing: being kind,

learning from experience, doing something new, differentiating between right and wrong.

Some of the have been achieved over the years. Ex. Machines today do learn from experience.

Fact: Automated programs are used to grade GMAT essay questions.

May be over the years machines can do the rest of “X's”.

Machines are formal systems limited by incompleteness theorem. Ex. They cannot establish the truth of Godel sentence.

Humans have no such limitation.“Humans are superior to machines”

Problems with the claim:Godels Theorem applies only to

formal systems powerful enough to do arithmetic.

Applies to Turing Machines and not to computers.

Turing Machines have infinite memory but not computers.

Truth of some sentence should be established by all agents.

Eg: Lucas cannot consistently assert that this sentence is true.

Even if computers have limitations on what they can prove, there is no evidence that humans can prove those results.

Human behavior is far too complex to be captured by any simple set of rules

Computers can do no more than follow a set of rules.

So they cannot generate behavior as intelligent as that of humans.

The inability to capture everything in a set of logical rules is called the “qualification problem” in AI.

No one has any idea of incorporating background knowledge into learning process.

This claim has been proved to be wrong.

Ex. Learning algorithms use background knowledge today.

Learning requires prior identification of relevant inputs and correct outputs.

This claim has been proved to be wrong.

Ex. Unsupervised learning has been accomplished today.

Brain can direct its sensors to seek information and process it according to current situation.

Research is being done over this field and partial success has been achieved.

Machine can be said to have posses Strong AI if it could do whatever human brain could do in every possible way. Should posses casual powers of brain.

Have consciousness, self awareness, understanding, feel emotions, dream, think etc.,

No body cares about Strong AI. Pass the Turing test doesn’t imply actually

thinking, but still might be simulating thinking.

Jefferson’s Lister Oration for 1949, “Not until a machine can write a sonnet or compose a concerto because of thoughts and emotions felt, and not by the chance fall of symbols, could we agree that machine equals brain – that is not only write it but know that it had written it. No mechanism could feel (and not merely artificially signal, an easy contrivance) pleasure at its successes, grief when its valves fuse, be warmed by flattery, be made miserable by its mistakes, be charmed by sex, be angry or depressed when it cannot get what it wants”.

Should have Consciousness Phenomenology: machine has to actually feel

emotions Intentionality: whether the beliefs, desires and

intensions are “of” or “about” something in real world.

No direct evidence of other people mental states.

Lets accept that everyone thinks.

Artificial urea is urea, artificial insemination is insemination, artificial simulation of chess game is a chess game, artificial simulation of addition is addition but artificial monalisa is not monalisa, artificial simulation of storm is not storm, artificial scotch is not scotch.

Artificial mind ? Depends upon definition of mental states. Theory of functionalism. Biological naturalism theory.

Mental state (beliefs, desires, being in pain)is a condition which is between input and output.

S1 S2

1 “ODD”

S2

“EVEN”

S1

What is S1 ? Being in S1 = Being an x such that P Q[If x is in P

and gets a ‘1’ input, then it goes into Q and emits "Odd"; if x is in Q and gets a ‘1’ input it goes into P and emits "Even"& x is in P] (Note: read P as There is a property P.)}.

Functional State Identity Theory (FSIT) would identify pain (or, more naturally, the property of having a pain or being in pain) with the second-order relational property.

Being in pain = Being an x such that P Q[sitting on a tack causes P & P causes both Q and emitting ‘ouch’ & x is in P]

The nature of a mental state is just like the nature of an automaton state.

Mental state is a result of neural activity. John Searle 1980 1) all mental phenomena from pain,

tickles, and itches to the most abstruse thoughts are caused by lower-level neurobiological processes in the brain.2) mental phenomena are higher level features of the brain.

brains and only brains can cause consciousness.

Consciousness is ontologically subjective in the sense that it only exists when experienced by a human or animal subject.

Dualist theory – soul is different from body. René Descartes‘. Ghost in a machine !!.

Mind architecture. Monist theory – mind and body are

same. Only thing that is proven to exists is

matter. Searle – “brain cause mind”. Free will – materialist deal with it.

Hilary Putnam first presented the argument that we cannot be brains in a vat.

A term refers to an object only if there is an appropriate causal connection between that term and the object. (CC)

1) Assume we are brains in a vat .2) If we are brains in a vat, then “brain” does not refer to brain, and “vat” does not refer to vat (via CC) .3) If “brain in a vat” does not refer to brains in a vat, then “we are brains in a vat” is false .

4) Thus, if we are brains in a vat, then the sentence “We are brains in a vat” is false (1,2,3).

Mental state that “I need a pizza” are they same in both worlds ?

Wide content – knows everything, from outside.

Narrow content – within same world. Qualia – difference between human beings

and zombies. Matrix - 1999 , Wachowski brothers.

Replace each neuron by electronic devices slowly one by one.

What happens to consciousness ?Functionalist – consciousness

remainsBiological naturalist – consciousness

vanishes.Brain computer interface (BCI)

Against strong AI.Searle’s axioms:1) Minds have mental contents;

specifically, they have semantic contents.2) Computer programs are entirely defined by their formal, or syntactical, structure.3) Syntax is not sufficient for semantics (against functionalism).4)Brains cause minds.

-AJAY GARG

the most difficult problems are informally known as AI-complete.

implying that the difficulty of these computational problems is equivalent to solving the central artificial intelligence problem—making computers as intelligent as people.

The term was coined by Fanya Montalvo by analogy with NP-Complete in complexity theory.

To call a problem AI-complete reflects an attitude that it won't be solved by a simple algorithm.

The AI subarea of Natural Language is essentially the overlap of AI and computational Linguistics.

The goal of the area is to form a computational understanding of how people learn and use their native languages.

Consider a straight-forward, limited and specific task: machine translation.

To translate accurately, a machine must be able to understand the text.

It must be able to follow the author's argument, so it must have some ability to reason.

It must have extensive world knowledge so that it knows what is being discussed.

E.g. We gave the monkeys the bananas because they were hungry and We gave the monkeys the bananas because they were over-ripe.

It must also model the authors' goals, intentions, and emotional states to accurately reproduce them in a new language.

E.g. "I never said she stole my money" - Someone else said it, but I didn't.

E.g. “I never said she stole my money" - I said she stole someone else's money.

In short, the machine is required to have wide variety of human intellectual skills.

So this problem is believed to be AI-complete.

Vision is interpreting visual images that fall on the human retina or the camera lens.

The actual scene being looked at could be 2-dimensional such as a printed page of text or 3-dimensional such as the world about us.

The classical problem in computer vision is that of determining whether or not the image data contains some specific object, feature, or activity.

This task can normally be solved robustly and without effort by a human

Computer must be able to relate different object in the scene. So It must have extensive world knowledge.

PRAVEEN LAKHOTIA

Is it worth asking the question – “Can there be an ethical AI?”

Intrusion of machines in our life.Ex: ATMEx: Autopilot system in aero planesNeed for us to do things aside.

How much control does the machine intrusion have on us?

Consequence is diminishing role of humans in decision making.

What has this relinquishing of control to AIs got to do with them being ethical?▪ establish that the agent can and will carry out

our wishes.▪ we hold them responsible for the actions that

they carry out as part of that controlAlso If it is believed that AI’s can

think then why not believe that they can be ethical?

Another reason to care if Ais can be ethical is the affect that they have in changing society if they were able to be ethical.

One affect might be that the incorporation of machine agents into human practices will accelerate and deepen as artefacts simulate basic social capacities: dependence upon them will grow.

The attribution of human like agency to artefacts will change the image of both machines and of human beings.

Given the destructiveness of contemporary society, an examination of the additional influence that an ethical AI would have in the technologizing of human social relations is timely.

So what should we do??We need to control the way

machines can act.We need some kind of laws which

the machines will definitely abide in all circumstances.

Issac Asimov – Three law of robotics to govern Artificial Intelligent systems1. A robot may not injure a human being, or,

through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

A reading of his work concludes that no set of fixed laws can sufficiently match the possible behavior of AI agents and human society.

A criticism of Asimov's robot laws is that the installation of unalterable laws into a sentient consciousness would be a limitation of free will and therefore unethical.

Fiction – I, Robot, Aliens.Designing autonomous systems.

The arguments given against the objections raised in Weak AI show the progress of AI rather than its impossibility.

Searle claims that machines cannot have intelligence.

Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig. Artificial Intelligence – A Modern Approach. Pearson Education, Second Edition, 2005.

Searle J. R. Mind, brains and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1980.

Searle J.R. Mind, brains and science. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1984.

Searle J. R. Is the brain’s mind a Computer Program? Scientific American, 1990.

Turing A. Computing machinery and intelligence. 1950.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI-complete

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.Richard Lucas. An outline for

determining the ethics of AI.