Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pyrdc!pyrnj!rutgers!uwvax!uwslh!lishka
From: lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Fish-Guts)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Defining Machine Intelligence.
Message-ID: <404@uwslh.UUCP>
Date: 19 Nov 88 17:06:03 GMT
References: <484@soleil.UUCP> <4216@homxc.UUCP> <401@uwslh.UUCP> <1111@dukeac.UUCP>
Reply-To: lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Fish-Guts)
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison, State Hygiene Lab
Lines: 83

In article <1111@dukeac.UUCP> sbigham@dukeac.UUCP (Scott Bigham) writes:
>In article <401@uwslh.UUCP> lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Fish-Guts) writes:
>>I believe that artificial intelligence
>>is possible, but that machine intelligence will probably *NOT*
>>resemble human intelligence...
>
>So how shall we define machine intelligence?  More importantly, how will we
>recognize it when (if?) we see it?
>
>						sbigham

     A good question, to which I do not have a good answer.  I *have*
thought about it quite a bit, though ... however, I haven't come up
with much that I am satisfied with.  Here is what my current lines or
thought are on this subject:

     Many (if not most) attempts at definitions of "machine
intelligence" relate it to "human intelligence." However, I have yet
to find a good definition of "human intelligence" that is less vague
than a dictionary's definition.  It would seem (to me at least) that
AI scientists (as well as scientists in many other fields) have yet to
come up with a good, working definition of "human intelligence" that
most will accept.  Rather, most AI people I have spoken with
(including myself ;-) have a vague notion of what "human intelligence"
is, or else have definitions of "human intelligence" that relies on
many personal assumptions.  I still do not think that the AI community
has developed a definition of "human intelligence" that can be
universally presented in an introductory course on AI.  It is no
wonder, then, that there is no commonly accepted definition of machine
intelligence (which would seem to be a crucial definition in AI, IMHO).

     So how do we define machine intelligence?  I propose that we
define it apart from human intelligence at first, and try to relate it
to human intelligence afterwards.  In my opinion, machine intelligence
does not have to be the same as human intelligence (and probably will
not), for reasons I have mentioned in other articles.  From what I
have read here, I believe that at least a few other people in this
group also feel this way. 

     First, the necessary "features" of machine intelligence should be
discussed and decided upon.  It is important that this be done
*without* considering current architectures and AI knowledge; the
"features" should be for an ideal "machine intelligence," and not
geared towards something that can be achieve in fifty years.  Also,
human intelligence should be *considered* at this point, but not used
as a *basis* for defining machine intelligence; intelligence in other
beings (mammals, birds, insects, rocks (;-), whatever) should also be
considered. 

     Second, after having figured out what we want machine
intelligence to be, we should then try and come up with some good
"indicators" that could be used to tell whether an AI system exhibits
machine intelligence.  These indicators can include specific tests,
but I have a feeling that tests for any form of intelligence have
never been very good indicators (note that I do not put that much
value on IQ tests as measures of intelligence).  Indicators of
intelligence in humans and other beings should be considered here as
well (i.e. what do we feel is a good sign that someone is intelligent?).

     After all that is done (and it may never get done ;-), then we
can try and compare it to human intelligence.  Chances are the two
definitions of intelligence (for machines and humans) will be
different.  Of course, if, in looking at human intelligence, some
important points of machine intelligence have been missed, then
revisions are in order ... there is always time to revise the
definition.

      I am sorry that I could not provide a concrete definition of
what machine intelligence is.  However, I hoped I have provided a
small framework for discussions on how to go about defining machine
intelligence.  And of course all the above is only my view on the
subject, and is subject to change; do with it what you will ... if you
want to print it up and use it as bird-cage liner, well that is fine
by me ;-)

					.oO Chris Oo.-- 
Christopher Lishka                 ...!{rutgers|ucbvax|...}!uwvax!uwslh!lishka
Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene                   lishka%uwslh.uucp@cs.wisc.edu
Immunology Section  (608)262-1617                            lishka@uwslh.uucp

		 "I'm not aware of too many things...
		  I know what I know if you know what I mean"
		    -- Edie Brickell & the New Bohemians