Author: Dan Homan
Date: 06:25:54 12/17/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 16, 1999 at 21:17:46, Dann Corbit wrote: >A similar thread brings up an interesting question, "What is AI?" > >An old test was supposed to be that if we are playing a remote opponent we can't >tell if it is a human or a machine. I think that can probably be achieved now >(especially if we throw in a bit of randomness). > >Then what tends to happen is that we say, "That's not really artificial >intelligence. After all, it's just a machine, so it _can't_ be." We simply >move the target and we are safe from the encroachment of the machine into "our" >domain. I don't think it is a matter of limiting the domain. I think it is a matter of starting with poor definitions. We keep trying to define intelligence in terms of what humans do and don't do. Functional definitions are very difficult - particularly when limited to a single task or a restricted set of tasks. Just because we use intelligence to do a particular thing doesn't mean that intelligence is required to do that thing. In my view, intelligence isn't limited to humans - animals clearly have intelligence. Other primates, whales, and dolphins are obvious examples, but I have even seen adaptive learning and problem solving skills in my cats and dogs. Do these animals approach our level of ability? No, but I think it is a matter of degree and not a matter of kind. IMHO, intelligence is a kind of generalized leaning and problem solving ability. Higher levels of intelligence impart the ability to abstract from direct or even indirect experience which makes learning and problem solving extremely efficent. A key hallmark of intelligence seems to be the ability to adapt to new situations based on past experience (rather than pre-programmed instinct). Computers are a generalized problem solving tool. Clearly they could act as an intelligence if properly programmed. Do computers act as an intelligence? We need to define intelligence properly and then we will know. With the definition I proposed in another thread, some computer chess programs (like KnightCap) would display a limited form of intelligence in their ability to generalize from old experience to new experience in a useful way. The fact that an algorithm can generalize from past experience (even if generalize is used here in a rather limited sense) is extremely interesting. It tells us (that at least in principle) there is nothing special about our ability to generalize from our past experience. - Dan > >If (for instance) I was playing some opponent using Winboard and I only knew it >was one of: >"Kasparov" >"Deep Blue" > >I would have no way of guessing which was which, since either one would pound my >stuffings out effortlessly. > >So the question stands, "What is AI?" and along with it, the related question, >"Are chess programs intelligent?"
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.