- Posts: 5242
Turing Test success not so much of a success?
Kevin Warwick, a professor of cybernetics at Reading University, called his recent experiment in which a computer fooled humans in the Turing Test an “important landmark”, but scientific opposition is gathering.
Prof Warwick made headlines when the university claimed the 65-year old Turing Test was passed for the first time by a “supercomputer” called Eugene Goostman at an event organised by Prof Warwick at the Royal Society in London.
Ten out of thirty human judges believed they were speaking to a real teenage boy during a five minute period, so the experiment was hailed as a victory.
However, other experts said the announcement trivialised “serious” AI (Artificial Intelligence) research, and fooled people into believing that the world of science fiction could soon become science fact.
Prof Warwick is considered a maverick among the science community. He first had a microchip implanted in his arm that triggered a greeting from computers each day when he arrived at work.
The scientist later implanted sensors and a microchip into the nerves in his arm, similar to an implant he also gave to his wife, so that when someone grasped her hand Prof Warwick was able to experience the same sensation in his.
He claimed it was a form of telepathy as it allowed his nerves to feel what she was feeling over the internet, but the work was controversial among other scientists as they doubted whether his experiments were much more than entertainment.
The latest announcement that the Turing Test has been passed for the very first time has been met with yet more scepticism.
Prof Warwick said: ''In the field of Artificial Intelligence there is no more iconic and controversial milestone than the Turing Test.
“This milestone will go down in history as one of the most exciting.''
However, Professor Murray Shanahan, a professor of cognitive robotics at Imperial College London, said there were “a lot of problems” with the claims.
The scientist said that as Eugene was described to judges as a 13-year-old boy from Ukraine who learned English as a second language, some of the bizarre responses to questions could be explained away.
He said the five-minute conversation benchmark was "taken out of context" from the Turing Test, and fell well short of a true experiement for Artificial Intelligence, which should last for “hours, if not days”.
He also said the 30-strong judging panel, which included Robert Llewellyn, the Red Dwarf actor, was not big enough to support the claim.
Prof Shanahan told the Telegraph: “I think there are a lot of problems with the claims and I do not believe the Turing Test has been passed.
“I think the claim is completely misplaced, and it devalues real AI research. It makes it seem like science fiction AI is nearly here, when in fact it’s not and it’s incredibly difficult.”
Prof Shanahan added that the “supercomputer” was in fact a chatbot, a computer programme, rather than a powerful machine.
Gary Marcus, a professor of cognitive science at New York University, said in an article for the New Yorker: “Here’s what Eugene Goostman isn’t: a supercomputer.
“It is not a ground-breaking, super-fast piece of innovative hardware but simply a cleverly-coded piece of software.”
Prof Warwick told the Telegraph: “I think they’re just pointing fingers. It’s a particular aspect of Artificial Intelligence research. It’s an iconic test, it’s controversial, as we can see.
“I don’t think it devalues other Artificial Intelligence. If anything, I would say if it excites a few children, then I think it’s a good thing.”
Link to original webpost is here .
The scientist said that as Eugene was described to judges as a 13-year-old boy from Ukraine who learned English as a second language, some of the bizarre responses to questions could be explained away.
I find this a bit strange; surely passing the test would mean more if you were supposed to be talking to someone with the same level of English as you. I suppose though a 'pass' is a bit subjective; based on questions asked, length of period the test went on for, level of English of the people participating and so on.
This was someone else's criticisms...
It won't let me have a blank signature ...
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Posts: 14624
I thought the same thing, if you are going to call it a success, needs to be same language, and length of the average phone call...(ten minutes? Im not sure of average phone call length...
Still interesting though...
Thanks for sharing...
On walk-about...
Sith ain't Evil...
Jedi ain't Saints....
"Bake or bake not. There is no fry" - Sean Ching
Rite: PureLand
Former Memeber of the TOTJO Council
Master: Jasper_Ward
Current Apprentices: Viskhard, DanWerts, Llama Su, Trisskar
Former Apprentices: Knight Learn_To_Know, Knight Edan, Knight Brenna, Knight Madhatter
Please Log in to join the conversation.
if were got into a war with the new race of robots whose side would you be on ???????????????
humans ?
robots ?
or both ?
if its both your a Jedi in my view : )
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Wescli Wardest
- Offline
- Knight
- Unity in all Things
- Posts: 6458
The brain is a biological “machine”, an organ that acts on bio-chemical and bio-electrical synapsis. It is thought that the folds in the brain form at an early age and create the connections that cause us to “think” the way we do. Each connection being unique to the individual and so on and so on. But might there be more to it than just what can be observed with current scientific equipment?
I believe we will be able to create a device that will store memories and make them accessible to other or ourselves at a later date; but, I’m not so convinced that we will be able to create a mechanical or digital brain that has independent thought. As it stands, all computer programs are just that, programs. A series of conditions, logic statements and outputs based on various inputs. I have no doubt that given time we can easily create an artificial intelligence that will seem to have independent thought…
But then that begs to ask, what makes our thought processes so unique? I might venture to place the starting point of that question in our dreams. Not only the ones we have while sleeping, but our waking dreams, our aspirations and maybe even our desires. One might also consider the ability to make decisions based off emotional responses. So I would set the prerequisite for AI to be able to have an emotional response and either respond to it intellectually or not based on how that response coincides with desired outcome and severity of the emotion.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
There was a ted talk posted a while ago on the subject, we have always considered there to be some kind of special separation between us an our bodies (the Mind) which, as Watts points out, seems to act like a 'controller' but really no such thing exists, it just seems like that is the case. So without some kind of special Mind what else could explain it? That what we call consciousness is simply the product of a biological process and, like us, is nothing particularly special at all.
I am not a neuroscientist but that is probably the position I subscribe to.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
- Wescli Wardest
- Offline
- Knight
- Unity in all Things
- Posts: 6458
I agree that people tend to elevate themselves above other forms of life and that can be a very disturbing thought, as history has shown us. And I believe there are varying degrees of intellectual capability throughout the living world.
A reductio ad absurdum could be made that if there is no more special about us, our sentience, awareness or thought; then we could consider the limited responses of a computer program to be a level of intellect that we should hold sacred and protect. Where it may come to that one day… I do not feel the time has come yet. :ohmy:
:laugh:
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Also, I have found that many arent capable of my vocabulary and understanding with english now. People who are not robots, and not from the Ukraine. Just poorly educated, and in many cases, they are having a harder time making me believe they are human.
I suppose it was the same angst present when computers started beating humans at chess.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
I believe we will be able to create a device that will store memories and make them accessible to other or ourselves at a later date;
Cameras, flash drives, I phones, etc,etc, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUzFtWNOOOU
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Please Log in to join the conversation.
Could a computer have an out of body experience or a feeling of enlightenment? That is a much bigger question, one I would be skeptical saying yes to.
Why?
Humans themselves cannot truly quantify these concepts to any real degree. How then would an AI have any easier time doing so?
I think an AI would have a much easier time with the concept of OBE, given that it may not have a body as you understand it, not needing to be bound to a humanoid form to begin with.
It will also have access to the internet, which, for something so linked to it, would be consistent with OBE.
Enlightenment, well, I have no problem with an AI having sudden insights. How it came by those insights could be argumentive of programming, but then, what is training for humans if not programming?
Please Log in to join the conversation.