Exploring the Computational Explanatory Gap
James A. Reggia, Di-Wei Huang, Garrett E. Katz
Philosophies January 16, 2017 DOI: 10.3390/philosophies2010005 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Citations | 8 |
| Key points | Argues that a "computational explanatory gap"—the inability to explain high-level cognitive algorithms in terms of neurocomputational processing—is a major obstacle to machine consciousness. Proposes that gating mechanisms associated with top-down cognitive control of working memory be added to the list of computational correlates of consciousness, and that bridging this gap would inform the search for neurobiological correlates and help demystify the "hard problem" of mind–brain relations. |
Abstract
While substantial progress has been made in the field known as artificial consciousness, at the present time there is no generally accepted phenomenally conscious machine, nor even a clear route to how one might be produced should we decide to try. Here, we take the position that, from our computer science perspective, a major reason for this is a computational explanatory gap: our inability to understand/explain the implementation of high-level cognitive algorithms in terms of neurocomputational processing. We explain how addressing the computational explanatory gap can identify computational correlates of consciousness. We suggest that bridging this gap is not only critical to further progress in the area of machine consciousness, but would also inform the search for neurobiological correlates of consciousness and would, with high probability, contribute to demystifying the “hard problem” of understanding the mind–brain relationship. We compile a listing of previously proposed computational correlates of consciousness and, based on the results of recent computational modeling, suggest that the gating mechanisms associated with top-down cognitive control of working memory should be added to this list. We conclude that developing neurocognitive architectures that contribute to bridging the computational explanatory gap provides a credible and achievable roadmap to understanding the ultimate prospects for a conscious machine, and to a better understanding of the mind–brain problem in general.
Citations in the library
Cited by 4
- A Design of Global Workspace Model with Attention: Simulations of Attentional Blink and Lag-1 Sparing Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Consciousness October 13, 2021
- Active Inference as a Computational Framework for Consciousness Review of Philosophy and Psychology August 10, 2021
- Artificial Conscious Intelligence Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Consciousness March 1, 2020
- The neural correlates of consciousness under the free energy principle: From computational correlates to computational explanation
Cites 17
- On a confusion about a function of consciousness Behavioral and Brain Sciences June 1, 1995
- Breakdown of Cortical Effective Connectivity During Sleep Science September 29, 2005
- Neural Correlates of Consciousness The MIT Press eBooks August 28, 2000
- Large-scale signatures of unconsciousness are consistent with a departure from critical dynamics Journal of the Royal Society, Interface 2016
- The rise of machine consciousness: studying consciousness with computational models. Neural Networks August 1, 2013
and 12 more in the library