Philosophy 4610Philosophy 4610

Philosophy of MindPhilosophy of Mind

Week 9: AI in the Real WorldWeek 9: AI in the Real World

The “Chinese Room”The “Chinese Room”

The Chinese RoomThe Chinese Room

► In the Chinese Room, there is a rule In the Chinese Room, there is a rule book for manipulating symbols and an book for manipulating symbols and an operator who does not understand any operator who does not understand any ChineseChinese

►The Room produces perfectly good The Room produces perfectly good Chinese answers and could pass a Chinese answers and could pass a Turing Test conducted in ChineseTuring Test conducted in Chinese

►But nothing in the room actually But nothing in the room actually understands Chineseunderstands Chinese

The Chinese RoomThe Chinese Room

►According to Searle, in the Chinese Room According to Searle, in the Chinese Room there is intelligent-seeming behavior but there is intelligent-seeming behavior but no actual intelligence or understanding. no actual intelligence or understanding. There is There is syntaxsyntax (rules for the (rules for the manipulation of meaningless signs) but manipulation of meaningless signs) but the the semanticssemantics or or meaningmeaning of the signs is of the signs is missing. This shows, Searle argues, that missing. This shows, Searle argues, that rule-governed behavior is not enough to rule-governed behavior is not enough to give real understanding or thinking.give real understanding or thinking.

The Chinese Room: The The Chinese Room: The “Systems” Reply“Systems” Reply

►Even if there is no single element in the Even if there is no single element in the Chinese Room that understands Chinese, Chinese Room that understands Chinese, perhaps the understanding of Chinese perhaps the understanding of Chinese really is in the really is in the whole systemwhole system itself. itself.

►What are the criteria for “really What are the criteria for “really understanding” as opposed to just understanding” as opposed to just seeming to understand? What role (if seeming to understand? What role (if any) does experience, consciousness, or any) does experience, consciousness, or self-awareness play? How might we test self-awareness play? How might we test for these qualities? for these qualities?

The Loebner PrizeThe Loebner Prize

► Every year, philanthropist Every year, philanthropist Hugh Loebner sponsors a Hugh Loebner sponsors a “real-life” Turing Test“real-life” Turing Test

► He offers $100,000 to any He offers $100,000 to any computer program that can computer program that can successfully convince a successfully convince a panel of judges that it is panel of judges that it is “more human” than at least “more human” than at least one human subjectone human subject

► Every year, $2,000 is offered Every year, $2,000 is offered for the program judged for the program judged “most human”. “most human”.

The Loebner PrizeThe Loebner Prize

►Which of the transcripts seemed “most Which of the transcripts seemed “most human”? Which did not seem human”? Which did not seem “human” at all? Why?“human” at all? Why?

The Loebner Prize: The Loebner Prize: Things to Look ForThings to Look For

►Ambiguity.Ambiguity. Many words in English have Many words in English have multiple meanings. For example: “He put a multiple meanings. For example: “He put a check on the board” (here ‘check’ can mean check on the board” (here ‘check’ can mean either a monetary instrument, or a mark).either a monetary instrument, or a mark).

► ‘‘Canned’ responses.Canned’ responses. Many of the responses Many of the responses that a computer might give seem “automatic” that a computer might give seem “automatic” or inappropriate to the situation (how can you or inappropriate to the situation (how can you tell?)tell?)

► Jokes and puns.Jokes and puns. It is difficult for computers It is difficult for computers to understand jokes or puns that depend on to understand jokes or puns that depend on the difference between literal and metaphoric the difference between literal and metaphoric meaning (why?)meaning (why?)

Dreyfus and Dreyfus and What Computers Can’t DoWhat Computers Can’t Do

► Like his colleague Like his colleague Searle, Dreyfus thinks Searle, Dreyfus thinks that it will be much that it will be much harder than many have harder than many have assumed to build a real assumed to build a real thinking machine.thinking machine.

► He argues that it is He argues that it is much more difficult than much more difficult than it seems to “program in” it seems to “program in” ordinary, practical ordinary, practical intelligence of a kind we intelligence of a kind we exhibit constantly and exhibit constantly and everyday.everyday.

Artificial Intelligence: Artificial Intelligence: Two ApproachesTwo Approaches

► The “frame” approachThe “frame” approach (Minsky): To get a (Minsky): To get a computer to exhibit actual intelligence, we computer to exhibit actual intelligence, we just have to program it with an appreciation of just have to program it with an appreciation of the “frame” or context of ordinary human the “frame” or context of ordinary human situations.situations.

► The “script” approach The “script” approach (Schank): To get a (Schank): To get a computer to exhibit intelligence, we just need computer to exhibit intelligence, we just need to represent a “script” or plan for handling to represent a “script” or plan for handling ordinary situations (sitting in a chair, ordering ordinary situations (sitting in a chair, ordering at a restaurant, cooking an egg, etc.) at a restaurant, cooking an egg, etc.)

Scripts and Frames: Trying it Scripts and Frames: Trying it OutOut

►Let’s try to “program” an AI system to Let’s try to “program” an AI system to handle some ordinary tasks.handle some ordinary tasks.

►We’re allowed to specify any RULE We’re allowed to specify any RULE that we want, provided that the rules that we want, provided that the rules are well-defined in terms of the are well-defined in terms of the information available to the system. information available to the system.

Dreyfus: how do you sit in a Dreyfus: how do you sit in a chair?chair?► ““Anyone in our culture Anyone in our culture

understands such things understands such things as how to sit on kitchen as how to sit on kitchen chairs, swivel chairs, chairs, swivel chairs, folding chairs, and in arm folding chairs, and in arm chairs, rocking chairs, chairs, rocking chairs, deck chairs, barbers’ deck chairs, barbers’ chairs, sedan chairs, chairs, sedan chairs, dentists’ chairs, basket dentists’ chairs, basket chairs, reclining chairs, chairs, reclining chairs, wheel chairs, sling wheel chairs, sling chairs, and beanbag chairs, and beanbag chairs – as well as how to chairs – as well as how to get off/out of them get off/out of them again. … (p. 163).again. … (p. 163).

Dreyfus: The assumption of Dreyfus: The assumption of traditional AItraditional AI

► There is a great deal of knowledge that we There is a great deal of knowledge that we rely on everyday and use in a wide variety rely on everyday and use in a wide variety of situations that is not explicit.of situations that is not explicit.

► Traditional AI research assumes that this Traditional AI research assumes that this knowledge is all representable – that it can knowledge is all representable – that it can be programmed into a computer by be programmed into a computer by inputting a finite set of rules.inputting a finite set of rules.

► But Dreyfus argues that there is no reason But Dreyfus argues that there is no reason to think that this knowledge must be to think that this knowledge must be representable this way.representable this way.

Real-World AI: SummaryReal-World AI: Summary► Classical AI research, following Turing, Classical AI research, following Turing,

assumes that it’s possible to get a computer assumes that it’s possible to get a computer to be intelligent by programming it with some to be intelligent by programming it with some finite set of rules.finite set of rules.

► But passing a Turing test – or even being able But passing a Turing test – or even being able to function in everyday situations – requires a to function in everyday situations – requires a vast amount of knowledge that is not vast amount of knowledge that is not generally explicit.generally explicit.

► Is it possible to represent this knowledge at Is it possible to represent this knowledge at all? If it is not representable, then how do we all? If it is not representable, then how do we acquire it? Might an artificial system or robot acquire it? Might an artificial system or robot be able to acquire it as we do, even if it be able to acquire it as we do, even if it cannot be ‘programmed in’ explicitly? cannot be ‘programmed in’ explicitly?