The Turing Test is a Thought Experiment

Author:

Gonçalves BernardoORCID

Abstract

AbstractThe Turing test has been studied and run as a controlled experiment and found to be underspecified and poorly designed. On the other hand, it has been defended and still attracts interest as a test for true artificial intelligence (AI). Scientists and philosophers regret the test’s current status, acknowledging that the situation is at odds with the intellectual standards of Turing’s works. This article refers to this as the Turing Test Dilemma, following the observation that the test has been under discussion for over seventy years and still is widely seen as either too bad or too good to be a valuable experiment for AI. An argument that solves the dilemma is presented, which relies on reconstructing the Turing test as a thought experiment in the modern scientific tradition. It is argued that Turing’s exposition of the imitation game satisfies Mach’s characterization of the basic method of thought experiments and that Turing’s uses of his test satisfy Popper’s conception of the critical and heuristic uses of thought experiments and Kuhn’s association of thought experiments to conceptual change. It is emphasized how Turing methodically varied the imitation game design to address specific challenges posed to him by other thinkers and how his test illustrates a property of the phenomenon of intelligence and suggests a hypothesis on machine learning. This reconstruction of the Turing test provides a rapprochement to the conflicting views on its value in the literature.

Funder

Fundação de Amparo á Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Artificial Intelligence,Philosophy

Reference65 articles.

1. Blum, P. R. (2010). Michael Polanyi: Can the mind be represented by a machine? Documents of the discussion in 1949. Polanyiana, 19(1–2), 35–60. Retrieved July 3, 2022, from https://philpapers.org/rec/BLUMPC-2

2. Brewster, E. T. (1912). Natural wonders every child should know. New York: Doubleday, Doran & Co., Inc.

3. Bringsjord, S., Bello, P., & Ferrucci, D. (2001). Creativity, the Turing Test, and the (better) Lovelace Test. Minds and Machines, 11, 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011206622741

4. Copeland, B. J. (2000). The Turing test. Minds and Machines, 10(4), 519–539. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011285919106

5. Copeland, B. J. (2004). The essential turing: The ideas that gave birth to the computer age. Oxford: University Press.

Cited by 12 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3