Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The time when AI can overcome humans

  1. Aug 11, 2018 #1
    How much time the machine can overcome the human? I was thinking about around 50 years? But I am not sure. I would like that you guys can take me this doubt.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 11, 2018 #2

    anorlunda

    Staff: Mentor

  4. Aug 11, 2018 #3
    Hi @anorlunda,

    I'm asking about the machine overcomes the human mind, the conciousness.
    For example, I talk to a machine this:
    "My lawyer is a vampire".
    A human understood at that time that my lawyer sucks me too much money. I would like to know when the AI will arrive at this point.
     
  5. Aug 11, 2018 #4

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Our current AI likely can already parse this. I bet Siri might not be stumped by the analogy. The question is: by what criteria do you decide whether is has understood it? Probably by whether its response makes sense.

    The problem is, it's a continuum. Every example requires a different amount of conceptualizing horsepower.

    You might want to read upon The Turing Test. Essentially, it is a test that assumes there's no way to specifically quantify when a given machine has been successful at simulating a human. All you can do is try to stump it, and set a time limit on how long it has to keep up without the tester being able to tell.

    I mean, how would you know it "understands"? Talk to it for a minute? An hour? A year?
     
  6. Aug 11, 2018 #5
    at the time.
     
  7. Aug 11, 2018 #6
    I didn't know about this fact of Siri, Dave. Thanks!
     
  8. Aug 11, 2018 #7
    I'll read the Turing Test, I appreciate, Dave.
     
  9. Aug 11, 2018 #8

    mathman

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Machines can be programmed to respond sensibly, as long as the programmer can foresee these questions.
     
  10. Aug 11, 2018 #9

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Not a fact!

    Just an offhand guess. Siri is capable of some amount of simulated human interpretation. But it's just clever software, not AI.
     
  11. Aug 11, 2018 #10

    rcgldr

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Most of the chess engines are conventional programs. The main exception is Alpha Zero, which does use a form of neural network, first beating the best human players of "go". A different version using two neural networks (from what I understand), beat Stockfish version 8, which is already better than humans, but Stockfish 8 was limited to 1 move per minute, not letting it manage it's time better, and without the opening and end game table bases it normally used, and the current version Stockfish 9 was not used in the computer match.

    One of several articles about this:

    https://en.chessbase.com/post/alpha-zero-comparing-orang-utans-and-apples

    Still this is an example of an AI for a specific task, not a generalized AI. One milestone yet to be achieved is for an AI to achieve the overall general intelligence of a cricket or roach. I'm not sure this is possible, as some of the intelligence in living beings is "pre-programmed", for example Monarch butterfly migration, where the Monarchs go through 3 or 4 generations on the northward migration.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarch_butterfly_migration
     
  12. Aug 11, 2018 #11

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Of all things to have trouble with, why would a computer have trouble with pre-programmed behavior?

    That's the easy part. The hard part is learned behavior and adaptation.
     
  13. Aug 11, 2018 #12

    anorlunda

    Staff: Mentor

    I don't hold with narrow definitions of AI. I think our machines have effectively been doing AI in the broad sense since long before we had computers and software.
     
  14. Aug 11, 2018 #13

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I'm not sure what kind of definition of Artificial Intelligence would include machines that do not have software.

    Intelligence is generally understood to be the ability to apply existing patterns to new circumstances. I can't think of any examples that precede the advent of modern computers. Can you?


    Note that
    1. The term AI is generally invoked to distinguish it from the types of mechanical sophistication that have gone before it. Your definition essentially makes no distinction. So now we need a word for that.
    2. What term would you like to use to describe machines that can mimic sophisticated human behavior at a level better than mechanical devices have achieved before software? The rest of us call it AI.
    3. If you invoke your personal definition of AI when communicating with others, you will run into a lot of problems, since it already has a generally-accepted meaning.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2018
  15. Aug 11, 2018 #14

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Here's the basic definition in the Wikipedia page:
    "...any device that perceives its environment and takes actions that maximize its chance of successfully achieving its goals."

    That sounds like a mechanical thermostat to me.
     
  16. Aug 11, 2018 #15

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    That's quite a stretch for the term "intelligence".

    A thermostat is, at its core, simply a bimetallic coil that expands and contracts with temperature.

    If that qualifies as artificial intelligence, then the term has no useful meaning.

    I'd argue that's quite a stretch for the terms "perceive", "maximize its chance" and "goals" as well.

    I guess a windvane on a windmill counts as AI too.


    So now we need a new term for a device that can match human-level intelligence in behavior. AI is out. How about AI-ii?
     
  17. Aug 11, 2018 #16

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Agreed; That's exactly what my opinion on the subject is. I think it is a term used mostly to generate headlines, and has no useful meaning. But I would welcome being shown a useful definition/application for the term.
    Don't be silly. If computers matching human-level intelligence is the definition you choose, so be it, but please recognize that that isn't anything special. Mechanical computers were doing that a hundred plus years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Difference_engine

    The entire point of a computer - mechanical or digital - is that it exceeds human intelligence. We wouldn't use them otherwise!
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2018
  18. Aug 11, 2018 #17

    nsaspook

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Last edited: Aug 11, 2018
  19. Aug 12, 2018 at 12:26 AM #18

    DaveC426913

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Maybe so in the media, but that shouldn't be where the bar is set. Those who want to discuss artificial intelligence should have a useful working definition.

    Of course I was being facetious. That was more directed at anorlunda's idea of the folly of eliminating the distinction between mere mechanical aptitude and bona fide intelligence.

    I thought of the Difference Engine, but didn't mention it as I didn't expect anyone to actually consider it as an example of intelligence.

    It does very dumb things, just fast. That is not any definition of intelligence I would go with.

    I stand by the hallmark of intelligence as the ability to adapt (that is, self-adapt) to new situations. The DI cannot do that at all.

    I completely disagree.

    The DI, for example doesn't exceed human intelligence at all. It is doing basic arithmetic - nothing more than a (very) patient Grade 2 student could do using a pencil and a (very) long sheet of foolscap.

    DI can't abstract concepts, or apply previous lessons to another problem it has not seen before.

    The point of (current) computers is that they do mundane things very fast. I see virtually no intelligence in there excepting software that is so sophisticated it is capable of making decisions between a blurred set of competing goals (if they're not blurry, then straight mathematical calculations with unambiguous outcomes would suffice - i.e what mainstream computers of today do. But they're starting to teach them fuzzy logic).
     
  20. Aug 12, 2018 at 7:27 AM #19

    anorlunda

    Staff: Mentor

    I'll give a reason why I don't like narrow AI definitions. A narrow definition presupposes a particular approach to the solution, and excludes the chance that someone will succeed by a very different approach.

    In the 80s, knowledge-based systems and inference engines were the only serious contenders for AI. Neural nets were on the fringe and were not (perhaps still not) considered intelligent.

    Logic is an approach.
    Neural nets is an approach.
    Software is an approach.
    What about biology?
    What about approaches not yet conceived?

    When debugging or inventing is it very important to keep your mind open and not presuppose the path to solution.
     
  21. Aug 12, 2018 at 9:01 AM #20

    rcgldr

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    I wasn't considering AI that would include both pre-programed and learned behavior. In that case, I'm not sure how much of the intelligence of a cricket or roach is pre-programmed versus learned, but I do recall duplicating the intelligence of small insects like that was at least at one time considered an early goal for AI, so it's not clear to me why that was considered as an early goal for AI. It might have been related to how to react to a situation never encountered before, if it's a problem solving process (possibly based on the nearest similar experience) as opposed to a pre-programmed response. I think a key point made in an old article was trying to duplicate how living things actually think, or ways to emulate that process.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted