Dear John and Matthew, (01)
The list of four personalities is a good one, but
it is not likely to be achieved in the next
hundred years. I especially like the lawyer and
politician personalities, but how would you make
the politician lie consistently? That would be
required for realistic simulation of a real
politician. (02)
-Rich (03)
Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2 (04)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Matthew West
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 1:01 AM
To: '[ontolog-forum] '
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Advances in Cognitive
Systems (05)
Dear John,
I wrote a paper a few years ago:
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/publications/Intell
igenceInSystems.pdf
which takes a rather different approach. Rather
than asking whether a system
can fool you into thinking it is a person, it asks
what it is about a system
that makes you consider it "intelligent" or "dumb"
(we've all encountered
plenty of the later, and maybe a few of the
former).
I outlined four signs to look for to assess a
systems "intelligence".
. They do things for you, or are helpful for the
things you do.
. They are able to cope with the new or
unexpected.
. They are able to communicate and "understand"
information from different
sources.
. They "understand" their own workings and help
you in setting up and using
themselves.
It seems to me that your list below is just
focussing on the first of these.
Watson would seem to do at least the first three
to a significant degree (I
simply don't know about the fourth).
I personally don't care much about whether a
system can fool me into
thinking it's a person. I do care about the list
above, and how we can work
towards systems that do these things better (and
of course the role of
ontology in achieving them). (06)
Regards (07)
Matthew West
Information Junction
Mobile: +44 750 3385279
Skype: dr.matthew.west
matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/
https://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
This email originates from Information Junction
Ltd. Registered in England
and Wales No. 6632177.
Registered office: 8 Ennismore Close, Letchworth
Garden City, Hertfordshire,
SG6 2SU. (08)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of John F Sowa
Sent: 03 September 2014 16:30
To: [ontolog-forum]
Cc: patrick.w.langley@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ontolog-forum] Advances in Cognitive
Systems (09)
Volume 3, September 2013 to August 2014, of the
Journal _Advances in
Cognitive Systems_ is available for free download: (010)
http://www.cogsys.org/journal/volume-3/ (011)
The editor, Pat Langley, proposed four research
challenges that are more
realistic than the Turing test: (012)
http://www.cogsys.org/pdf/paper-9-3-37.pdf (013)
Following are the four challenges: (014)
1. A synthetic entertainer -- a
singer-songwriter that people would
enjoy listening to. (015)
2. A synthetic attorney that would interview a
client, gather
information, plan a defense, interact with
the judge and witnesses,
and prepare and present a closing argument. (016)
3. A synthetic politician that would analyze
information about
current issues, write and deliver speeches,
answer questions,
and participate in debates with other
candidates. (017)
4. A synthetic teacher that would compose
lectures on a subject,
present them to students, answer questions
during or after the
lectures, generate exercises and tests, and
grade the answers. (018)
When the movie _2001: A Space Odyssey_ came out in
1968, Marvin Minsky, who
had been a technical adviser for it, said that the
HAL 9000 was a
"conservative estimate" of the state of the art of
AI in 2001. (019)
An AI system with the abilities of HAL could do a
respectable job as an
entertainer, attorney, politician, or teacher.
But there is no research
prototype today that comes remotely close. (020)
I'm not sure about the practical value of
synthetic politician, but any AI
system that could do even a subset of the tasks
that Langley lists for the
attorney or teacher would be extremely valuable. (021)
Why can't AI do those tasks today? What kind of R
& D would help? (022)
John (023)
__________________________________________________
_______________
Message Archives:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-f
orum/
Unsubscribe:
mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePa
ge#nid1J (024)
__________________________________________________
_______________
Message Archives:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-f
orum/
Unsubscribe:
mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePa
ge#nid1J (025)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (026)
|