Not only a lack of right definitions: Arguments for a shift in information-processing paradigm
Emanuel Diamant
arXiv Preprint Archive September 1, 2010 preprint
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Cs.ai Q-bio.nc |
| Key points | Argues that progress in creating machines with human-like features and capabilities is unsatisfactory because the notions of cognition and intelligence are blurred and ill-defined and the field's basic concepts are undefined or vague, leading to inadequate research goals. The author illustrates this with examples from DARPA and European Commission documents and proposes remedies. |
Abstract
Machine Consciousness and Machine Intelligence are not simply new buzzwords that occupy our imagination. Over the last decades, we witness an unprecedented rise in attempts to create machines with human-like features and capabilities. However, despite widespread sympathy and abundant funding, progress in these enterprises is far from being satisfactory. The reasons for this are twofold: First, the notions of cognition and intelligence (usually borrowed from human behavior studies) are notoriously blurred and ill-defined, and second, the basic concepts underpinning the whole discourse are by themselves either undefined or defined very vaguely. That leads to improper and inadequate research goals determination, which I will illustrate with some examples drawn from recent documents issued by DARPA and the European Commission. On the other hand, I would like to propose some remedies that, I hope, would improve the current state-of-the-art disgrace.