Week 1 - article 1 Flashcards
Artikel 1
Progress Since the 1980s
The text maintains that computers have not fully replicated the multifaceted cognitive abilities of humans. Notably, successes in chess and computational vision are highlighted, but the author contends that these achievements often result from human programming rather than machines exhibiting true cognitive intelligence.
Example: Chess and Advancements
The text mentions Deep Fritz, a computer chess system that defeated the world champion Vladimir Kramnik in 2006. This example showcases the advancement of computers in specific tasks.
Example: Vision and Advancements:
Computational approaches have made substantial gains in vision. The text cites a neural network architecture that matches human performance in animal/non-animal categorization using unsupervised learning.
Example playing bridge:
Example from bridge playing to illustrate a fundamental aspect of human cognition:
the capacity to incorporate external information into decision-making.
Humans can consider information from outside a specific domain to reason effectively, a skill not yet mastered by AI systems.
Example playing bridge: limitations of AI (3)
Despite progress, machines lack the broad cognitive abilities exhibited by humans, such as:
open-ended thinking; and
adaptability.
Computers often lack awareness of external factors influencing a situation, limiting their ability to make contextually appropriate decisions.
Example of playing bridge:
Reason behind limitations AI
Narrow Focus: One major limitation is the narrow focus of existing AI systems. They excel in specific domains but struggle with incorporating diverse sources of information.
Example of playing bridge:
Prospects for overcoming limitations AI (2)
Incremental* Progress: The text expresses optimism about incremental progress in natural cognitive tasks, including language processing and memory retrieval.
Addressing Essential Shortfalls: There is a recognition of essential shortfalls in machine intelligence, suggesting a need for continued research and innovation.
Limitations of Computational Approaches (2)
Lack of Open-ended Characteristics:
Machines lack the open-ended characteristics of human cognition, which involves thinking beyond predefined rules.
Dependence on Human Programmers:
Current AI systems heavily rely on human programmers, raising questions about their autonomy and independence. It suggests that human programmers remain central to AI functionality, positioning machines more as sophisticated tools than autonomous, independent entities capable of self-directed thinking.
Reasons Behind Limitations (5)
The text suggests that machines still lack:
- fluidity
- adaptability
- creativity
- purposefulness
- insightfulness
seen in human cognitive abilities.
Prospects for Overcoming Limitations of computational approaches (2)
Exploration of Computational Power:
While acknowledging the potential role of computational power, the text implies that it alone may not be sufficient to overcome the identified limitations.
Future Progress:
The need for progress in computational theory, algorithms, representations, and architecture is highlighted as essential for advancing machine intelligence.
Marr’s Taxonomy*:
The text introduces Marr’s three-level taxonomy, emphasizing the significance of the computational level. It stresses the ongoing need to understand the information available in the environment and how it can be optimally utilized, particularly in natural task domains such as vision and speech perception.
Challenges in Computational Theory
The author discusses the intricacies* of framing computational problems, especially in terms of learning from observations.
Two contrasting views on the learner’s goal are presented:
- one emphasizing structured statistical models
- the other favoring optimal prediction.
The text calls for further exploration of these ideas.
Example of Natural scene statistics
The text mentions Geissler and Perry’s analysis of natural scene statistics, demonstrating a shift from intuitive heuristics to data-driven approaches.
Difficulty in Framing Computational Problems
The text acknowledges the challenge of precisely framing computational problems, especially in understanding the relationship between stimulus variables and underlying reality.
Prospects for Overcoming Difficulty in Framing Computational Problems (2)
Continuing Focus:
There is a call for continued focus on understanding what information is available in the environment and how it can be optimally used.
Exploration of Learning Goals:
The ongoing debate about the learner’s goal, whether structured statistical models or optimal prediction, indicates the need for further exploration.