An Essay concerning machine understanding
2405.01840
0
0
🤔
Abstract
Artificial intelligence systems exhibit many useful capabilities, but they appear to lack understanding. This essay describes how we could go about constructing a machine capable of understanding. As John Locke (1689) pointed out words are signs for ideas, which we can paraphrase as thoughts and concepts. To understand a word is to know and be able to work with the underlying concepts for which it is an indicator. Understanding between a speaker and a listener occurs when the speaker casts his or her concepts into words and the listener recovers approximately those same concepts. Current models rely on the listener to construct any potential meaning. The diminution of behaviorism as a psychological paradigm and the rise of cognitivism provide examples of many experimental methods that can be used to determine whether and to what extent a machine might understand and to make suggestions about how that understanding might be instantiated.
Get summaries of the top AI research delivered straight to your inbox:
Overview
- Current AI systems exhibit many useful capabilities, but they appear to lack true understanding
- The paper describes how we could construct a machine capable of genuine understanding
- It suggests that understanding involves connecting words to underlying concepts, not just processing language
Plain English Explanation
The paper explores the challenge of creating AI systems that can truly understand, rather than just process language. As the philosopher John Locke noted, words are signs for ideas or concepts. To understand a word, you need to grasp the underlying thought or concept it represents. Understanding between a speaker and listener happens when the speaker expresses their concepts in words and the listener recovers those same concepts.
Current AI language models rely on the listener to construct potential meaning from the words. But the paper suggests we could move beyond this by drawing on experimental methods from the shift from behaviorism to cognitive psychology. These methods could help determine whether and how a machine might actually understand, rather than just process, language.
Technical Explanation
The paper argues that while AI systems exhibit many impressive capabilities, they appear to lack genuine understanding. It proposes that to construct a machine capable of true understanding, we need to consider how humans understand language.
The philosopher John Locke observed that words are signs for ideas or concepts. Understanding a word means knowing and being able to work with the underlying concept it represents. Understanding between a speaker and listener occurs when the speaker expresses their concepts in words, and the listener recovers approximately those same concepts.
In contrast, current AI language models rely on the listener to construct potential meaning from the words alone. The paper suggests we could move beyond this by drawing on experimental methods that emerged with the shift from behaviorism to cognitive psychology. These methods could help determine whether and to what extent a machine might understand language, and provide insights into how that understanding could be instantiated.
Critical Analysis
The paper raises important questions about the nature of machine understanding and consciousness. While it does not provide definitive answers, it highlights the need to go beyond simply processing language to achieving genuine comprehension.
The proposed experimental methods from cognitive psychology could be a promising avenue for further research, but the paper does not delve into the specifics of how these might be applied to AI systems. Additional work would be needed to translate these techniques into a practical framework for assessing and developing understanding in machines.
The paper also does not address the potential challenges and limitations of trying to create artificial understanding, such as the possibility of computational dualism or the inherent difficulties in fully replicating human-like cognition. Further exploration of these issues would be valuable.
Conclusion
This paper offers a thought-provoking perspective on the challenge of creating AI systems that can truly understand, rather than just process, language and information. By drawing on insights from philosophy and cognitive psychology, it suggests new directions for research into machine comprehension and consciousness. While more work is needed to translate these ideas into practical solutions, the paper highlights the importance of going beyond current language models to achieve deeper levels of understanding in artificial intelligence.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
💬
On the Computation of Meaning, Language Models and Incomprehensible Horrors
Michael Timothy Bennett
0
0
We integrate foundational theories of meaning with a mathematical formalism of artificial general intelligence (AGI) to offer a comprehensive mechanistic explanation of meaning, communication, and symbol emergence. This synthesis holds significance for both AGI and broader debates concerning the nature of language, as it unifies pragmatics, logical truth conditional semantics, Peircean semiotics, and a computable model of enactive cognition, addressing phenomena that have traditionally evaded mechanistic explanation. By examining the conditions under which a machine can generate meaningful utterances or comprehend human meaning, we establish that the current generation of language models do not possess the same understanding of meaning as humans nor intend any meaning that we might attribute to their responses. To address this, we propose simulating human feelings and optimising models to construct weak representations. Our findings shed light on the relationship between meaning and intelligence, and how we can build machines that comprehend and intend meaning.
4/12/2024
🐍
Can a Machine be Conscious? Towards Universal Criteria for Machine Consciousness
Nur Aizaan Anwar, Cosmin Badea
0
0
As artificially intelligent systems become more anthropomorphic and pervasive, and their potential impact on humanity more urgent, discussions about the possibility of machine consciousness have significantly intensified, and it is sometimes seen as 'the holy grail'. Many concerns have been voiced about the ramifications of creating an artificial conscious entity. This is compounded by a marked lack of consensus around what constitutes consciousness and by an absence of a universal set of criteria for determining consciousness. By going into depth on the foundations and characteristics of consciousness, we propose five criteria for determining whether a machine is conscious, which can also be applied more generally to any entity. This paper aims to serve as a primer and stepping stone for researchers of consciousness, be they in philosophy, computer science, medicine, or any other field, to further pursue this holy grail of philosophy, neuroscience and artificial intelligence.
5/1/2024
📈
Machine Consciousness as Pseudoscience: The Myth of Conscious Machines
Eduardo C. Garrido-Merch'an
0
0
The hypothesis of conscious machines has been debated since the invention of the notion of artificial intelligence, powered by the assumption that the computational intelligence achieved by a system is the cause of the emergence of phenomenal consciousness in that system as an epiphenomenon or as a consequence of the behavioral or internal complexity of the system surpassing some threshold. As a consequence, a huge amount of literature exploring the possibility of machine consciousness and how to implement it on a computer has been published. Moreover, common folk psychology and transhumanism literature has fed this hypothesis with the popularity of science fiction literature, where intelligent robots are usually antropomorphized and hence given phenomenal consciousness. However, in this work, we argue how these literature lacks scientific rigour, being impossible to falsify the opposite hypothesis, and illustrate a list of arguments that show how every approach that the machine consciousness literature has published depends on philosophical assumptions that cannot be proven by the scientific method. Concretely, we also show how phenomenal consciousness is not computable, independently on the complexity of the algorithm or model, cannot be objectively measured nor quantitatively defined and it is basically a phenomenon that is subjective and internal to the observer. Given all those arguments we end the work arguing why the idea of conscious machines is nowadays a myth of transhumanism and science fiction culture.
5/14/2024
🤔
Artificial consciousness. Some logical and conceptual preliminaries
K. Evers, M. Farisco, R. Chatila, B. D. Earp, I. T. Freire, F. Hamker, E. Nemeth, P. F. M. J. Verschure, M. Khamassi
0
0
Is artificial consciousness theoretically possible? Is it plausible? If so, is it technically feasible? To make progress on these questions, it is necessary to lay some groundwork clarifying the logical and empirical conditions for artificial consciousness to arise and the meaning of relevant terms involved. Consciousness is a polysemic word: researchers from different fields, including neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence, robotics, and philosophy, among others, sometimes use different terms in order to refer to the same phenomena or the same terms to refer to different phenomena. In fact, if we want to pursue artificial consciousness, a proper definition of the key concepts is required. Here, after some logical and conceptual preliminaries, we argue for the necessity of using dimensions and profiles of consciousness for a balanced discussion about their possible instantiation or realisation in artificial systems. Our primary goal in this paper is to review the main theoretical questions that arise in the domain of artificial consciousness. On the basis of this review, we propose to assess the issue of artificial consciousness within a multidimensional account. The theoretical possibility of artificial consciousness is already presumed within some theoretical frameworks; however, empirical possibility cannot simply be deduced from these frameworks but needs independent empirical validation. We break down the complexity of consciousness by identifying constituents, components, and dimensions, and reflect pragmatically about the general challenges confronting the creation of artificial consciousness. Despite these challenges, we outline a research strategy for showing how awareness as we propose to understand it could plausibly be realised in artificial systems.
4/1/2024