Although we have stated that AI is exciting, we have not defined it. Figure 1.1 depicts eight AI definitions organized in two dimensions. The definitions at the top and bottom focus on thinking and reasoning, while the ones at the bottom focus on behavior.
 |
| Figure 1.1 |
Acting humanly: The Turing Test approach
The Turing Test, which is Alan Turing proposed in 1950, was made to give a good operational definition of intelligence. If a human interrogator, after asking some written questions, can't tell if the written responses are from a person or a computer, the computer has passed the test.The specifics of the test and the question of whether a computer would truly be if it passed are discussed in upcoming articles.For the time being, we should note that programming a computer to pass a rigorous test gives us a lot to work on. The following features would be required of the computer:
natural language processing so that it can effectively communicate in English; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING
Representation of knowledge to store what it hears or knows; KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION
Automated reasoning that makes use of the stored information to answer questions and reach new conclusion
Automated mechine learning can recognize and extrapolate patterns and adapt to new conditions.
Total turning test
Turing's test deliberately avoided direct physical interaction between the interrogator and the computer.Because it is unnecessary for intelligence to physically simulate a person, However, the "total Turing test," also known as the "total Turing test," offers the interrogator the chance to pass physical objects "through the hatch" and a video signal to assess the subject's perceptual abilities. To breeze through the complete Turing Assessment, the computer will require
Computer version and robotics
computer vision to perceive objects, and robotics to manipulate objects and move about.
The majority of AI is made up of these six fields, and Turing deserves credit for creating a test that still holds up 60 years later. However, AI researchers have not put much effort into passing the Turing Test because they believe that studying the underlying principles of intelligence is more important than replicating an example. When the Wright brothers and others started using wind tunnels and learning about aerodynamics, the search for "artificial flight" became successful. The creation of "machines that fly so exactly like pigeons that they can fool even other pigeons" is not defined as the objective of the field of aerospace engineering in textbooks.
Thinking humanly: The cognitive modeling approach
We must be able to determine how humans think in order to claim that a given program thinks like a human. We need to get inside the minds of real people.This can be accomplished in three ways: through reflection, in the effort to record our own thoughts as they occur; through psychological experiments, such as observing an individual's behavior; and by observing the brain in action through brain imaging.
It becomes possible to express the theory as a computer program once we have a sufficiently precise theory of the mind. There is evidence that some of the program's mechanisms may also be operating in humans if the program's input–output behavior matches human behavior. For instance, Allen Newellfurthermore, Herbert Simon, who created GPS, the "General Issue Solver" (Newell and Simon,1961), were not content simply to have their program take care of issues accurately.
They were more concerned with comparing its reasoning steps to those of human subjects solving the same problems in cognitive science. Computer models from artificial intelligence and psychological experimentation are combined in the interdisciplinary field of cognitive science to develop precise and testable theories of the human mind.
According to Wilson and Keil (1999), cognitive science is a fascinating field that merits several textbooks and at least one encyclopedia. We will occasionally discuss the similarities and differences between human cognition and AI techniques. However, the foundation of genuine cognitive science must be actual human or animal experiments. Since we presume that the reader only has a computer for experimentation, we will leave that for other books.
In the early days of AI, the approaches were frequently misunderstood: a creatorwould contend that a calculation performs well on an undertaking and that it is in this manner a decent modelof human execution, or the other way around. Modern authors distinguish between the two types of claim.
Because of this distinction, AI and cognitive science have been able to advance at a faster rate. In computer vision, which incorporates neurophysiological evidence into computational models, the two fields continue to fertilize each other.
Thinking rationally: The “laws of thought” approach
One of the first to attempt to codify "right thinking," also known as processes of irrefutable reasoning, was the Greek philosopher Aristotle. His syllogisms provided a pattern for argument structures that, when given the right premises, always led to the right conclusions. For instance, "Socrates is a man; Men are all mortal; As a result, Socrates dies. The mind's operation was supposed to be governed by these laws of thought; The discipline of logic was founded on their research.
In the 19th century, logicians created a precise notation for statements about all kinds of world objects and their relationships. This is in contrast to standard arithmetic notation, which only allows for statements about numbers.) By 1965, there were programs that could theoretically solve any logically solvable problem. However, if there is no solution, the program might continue to loop forever.) The purported logicist custom inside.
man-made reasoning desires to expand on such projects to make canny frameworks.This method faces two primary challenges. First, expressing informal knowledge in the formal terms required by logical notation is difficult, especially when the knowledge is less than 100% certain. Second, there is a major contrast between settling an issue "on a basic level" and settling it practically speaking.
Any computer's computational resources can be depleted by problems with just a few hundred facts if it doesn't know which reasoning steps to try first. Even though these two obstacles are applicable to any attempt to construct computational reasoning systems, the logicist tradition was the first to encounter them.
Acting rationally: The rational agent approach
A specialist is simply something that demonstrations (specialist comes from the Latin agere, to do). Of course, every computer program does something, but more is expected of computer agents: operate independently, perceive their surroundings, persist over time, adjust to change, and set and pursue goals. When there is uncertainty, the best expected outcome is the goal of a rational agent, who acts accordingly.
In the "laws of thought" approach to AI, correct inferences were emphasized. Being a rational agent sometimes requires drawing accurate inferences because one way to act rationally is to reason logically to the conclusion that a particular action will achieve one's goals and then to act on that conclusion. However, correct inference requires more than rationality; There are times when there is nothing that can be proven to be right, but something still needs to be done.
In addition, there are rational actions that do not require inference. Recoiling from a hot stove, for instance, is a reflexive action that usually succeeds better than a slower one taken after careful consideration.
An agent is able to act rationally because it possesses all of the skills required for the Turing Test. Agents are able to make sound decisions through knowledge representation and reasoning. To survive in a complex society, we need to be able to construct natural language sentences that others can understand. Not only do we need to learn to be smart, but learning also makes it easier for us to make good decisions.
In comparison to the other approaches, the rational-agent approach has two advantages. First, it is more general than the "laws of thought" method because rationality can be achieved through a variety of means, and correct inference is just one of them. Second, it makes it easier to logical advancement than are approaches in view of human way of behaving or human idea. It is possible to "unpack" agent designs that provably achieve the standard of rationality, which is mathematically well defined and completely general.
Human way of behaving, on the otherhand, is all around adjusted for one unambiguous climate and is characterized by, indeed, the entiretyof the multitude of things that people do. As a result, the primary focus of this book is on the general principles and components of rational agents. We will discover that, despite the apparent simplicity of the problem's formulation, numerous issues arise when attempting to resolve it. Some of these issues are described in more detail in upcoming
One crucial point to remember: In complex environments, it is impossible to achieve perfect rationality—always doing the right thing—as we will soon discover. The computational requirements are simply excessive. However, for the majority of the book, we will ad here to the working hypothesis that perfect rationality is a useful analytical starting point. It improvesthe issue and gives the fitting setting to a large portion of the central material in the field.
In this way our team continue the ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (A Modern Approach) stay tuned
No comments:
Post a Comment