Download - CMSC 471 Fall 2002
![Page 1: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
CMSC 471CMSC 471Fall 2002Fall 2002
Class #10 – Wednesday, October 12
![Page 2: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Today’s class
• History of AI– Key people– Significant events
• Future of AI– Where are we going
• Philosophy of AI– Can we build intelligent machines?
• If we do, how will we know they’re intelligent?
– Should we build intelligent machines?• If we do, how should we treat them…• …and how will they treat us?
![Page 3: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
History of AI
Chronology of AI; Russell & Norvig Ch. 26
![Page 4: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Key people (AI prehistory)
• George Boole invented propositional logic (1847)
• Karel Capek coined the term “robot” (1921)
• Isaac Asimov wrote many sf books and essays (I, Robot (1950) introduced the Laws of Robotics – if you haven’t read it, you should!)
• John von Neumann: minimax (1928), computer architecture (1945)
• Alan Turing: universal machine (1937), Turing test (1950)
• Norbert Wiener founded the field of cybernetics (1940s)
• Marvin Minsky: neural nets (1951), AI founder, blocks world, Society of Mind
• John McCarthy invented Lisp (1958) and coined the term AI (1957)
• Allen Newell, Herbert Simon: GPS (1957), AI founders
• Noam Chomsky: analytical approach to language (1950s)
![Page 5: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Key people (early AI history)
• Hubert and Stuart Dreyfus: anti-AI specialists
• Ed Feigenbaum: DENDRAL (first expert system, 1960s)
• Terry Winograd: SHRDLU (blocks world, 1960s)
• Roger Schank: conceptual dependency graphs, scripts (1970s)
• Shakey: mobile robot (SRI, 1969)
• Doug Lenat: AM, EURISKO (math discovery, 1970s)
• Ed Shortliffe, Bruce Buchanan: MYCIN (uncertainty factors, 1970s)
![Page 6: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Key events: Genesis of AI
• Turing test, proposed in 1950 and debated ever since
• Neural networks, 1940s and 1950s, among the earliest theories of how we might reproduce intelligence
• Logic Theorist and GPS, 1950s, early symbolic AI
• Dartmouth University summer conference, 1956, established AI as a discipline
• Early years: focus on search, learning, knowledge representation
• Development of Lisp, late 1950s
![Page 7: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Key events: Adolescence of AI• The movie 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) brought AI to the public’s
attention• Early expert systems: DENDRAL, Meta-DENDRAL, MYCIN• Arthur Samuels’s checkers player, Doug Lenat’s AM and EURISKO
systems, and Werbos’s and Rumelhart’s backpropagation algorithm held out hope for the ability of AI systems to learn
• Hype surrounding expert systems led to an inevitable decline in interest in the mid to late 1980s, when it was realized they couldn’t do everything
• Hype surrounding neural networks in the late 1980s led to similar disappointment in the 1990s
• Roger Schank’s conceptual dependency theory and Doug Lenat’s Cyc started to address problems of common-sense reasoning and representation
• Hans Berliner’s heuristic search player defeated the world backgammon champion in 1979
![Page 8: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Key events: AI adulthood (barely)
• Many commercial expert systems introduced, especially in the 1970s and 1980s
• Fuzzy logic and neural networks used in controllers, especially in Japan and Europe
• Recent developments and areas of great interest include:– Bayesian reasoning and Bayes nets– Ontologies, knowledge reuse, and knowledge acquisition– Mixed-initiative systems that combine the best of human and
computer reasoning– Multi-agent systems, Internet economies, intelligent agents– Autonomous systems for space exploration, search and rescue,
hazardous environments
![Page 9: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Are we there yet?
• Great strides have been made in knowledge representation and decision making
• Many successful applications have been deployed to (help) solve specific problems
• Key open areas remain:– Incorporating uncertain reasoning– Real-time deliberation and action– Perception (including language) and action (including speech)– Lifelong learning / knowledge acquisition– Common-sense knowledge– Methodologies for evaluating intelligent systems
![Page 10: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Philosophy of AI
Alan M. Turing, “Computing Machinery and Intelligence”
John R. Searle, “Minds, Brains, and Programs”
(also: Russell & Norvig Ch. 27)
![Page 11: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Philosophical debates
• What is AI, really?– What does an intelligent system look like?
– Does an AI need—and can it have—emotions, consciousness, empathy, love?
• Can we ever achieve AI, even in principle?
• How will we know if we’ve done it?
• If we can do it, should we?
![Page 12: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Turing test
• Basic test: – Interrogator in one room, human in another, system in a third
– Interrogator asks questions; human and system answer
– Interrogator tries to guess which is which
– If the system wins, it’s passed the Turing Test
• The system doesn’t have to tell the truth (obviously…)
![Page 13: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Turing test objections
• Objections are basically of two forms:– “No computer will ever be able to pass this test”
– “Even if a computer passed this test, it wouldn’t be intelligent”
• Chinese Room argument (Searle, 1980), responses, and counterresponses– Robot reply
– Systems reply
![Page 14: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
“Machines can’t think”
• Theological objections• “It’s simply not possible, that’s all”• Arguments from incompleteness theorems
– But people aren’t complete, are they?
• Machines can’t be conscious or feel emotions– Reductionism doesn’t really answer the question: why can’t
machines be conscious or feel emotions??
• Machines don’t have Human Quality X• Machines just do what we tell them to do
– Maybe people just do what their neurons tell them to do…
• Machines are digital; people are analog
![Page 15: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
“The Turing test isn’t meaningful”
• Maybe so, but…
If we don’t use the Turing test, what measure should we use?
• Very much an open question…
![Page 16: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Ethical concerns: Robot behavior
• How do we want our intelligent systems to behave?
• How can we ensure they do so?
• Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics:1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a
human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
![Page 17: CMSC 471 Fall 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082710/56812aa7550346895d8e6911/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Ethical concerns: Human behavior
• Is it morally justified to create intelligent systems with these constraints?– As a secondary question, would it be possible to do so?
• Should intelligent systems have free will? Can we prevent them from having free will??
• Will intelligent systems have consciousness? (Strong AI) – If they do, will it drive them insane to be constrained by artificial
ethics placed on them by humans?
• If intelligent systems develop their own ethics and morality, will we like what they come up with?