AI@50: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Paulscrawl (talk | contribs) m →Selected Submitted Papers: Future Strategies for AI: fix Storrs authorlink; Bringsjord DOI |
Paulscrawl (talk | contribs) →Selected Submitted Papers: Future Strategies for AI: Müller's selected paper: Is There a Future for AI Without Representation? |
||
| Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
* [[J. Storrs Hall]], Self-improving AI: An Analysis<ref> {{cite journal | title = Self-improving AI: An Analysis | journal = Minds and Machines | date = 2007 | first = J. Stoors | last = Hall | volume = 17 | issue = 3 | pages = 249-259| id = {{doi | 10.1007/s11023-007-9065-3}} | url = http://www.springerlink.com/content/0n70u4l8q7235840/ | accessdate = 2010-06-10 |authorlink= J. Storrs Hall| quote = Self-improvement was one of the aspects of AI proposed for study in the 1956 Dartmouth conference. Turing proposed a “child machine” which could be taught in the human manner to attain adult human-level intelligence. In latter days, the contention that an AI system could be built to learn and improve itself indefinitely has acquired the label of the bootstrap fallacy. Attempts in AI to implement such a system have met with consistent failure for half a century. Technological optimists, however, have maintained that a such system is possible, producing, if implemented, a feedback loop that would lead to a rapid exponential increase in intelligence. We examine the arguments for both positions and draw some conclusions. }} [http://mol-eng.com/bootstrap.pdf Self-archive]</ref> |
* [[J. Storrs Hall]], Self-improving AI: An Analysis<ref> {{cite journal | title = Self-improving AI: An Analysis | journal = Minds and Machines | date = 2007 | first = J. Stoors | last = Hall | volume = 17 | issue = 3 | pages = 249-259| id = {{doi | 10.1007/s11023-007-9065-3}} | url = http://www.springerlink.com/content/0n70u4l8q7235840/ | accessdate = 2010-06-10 |authorlink= J. Storrs Hall| quote = Self-improvement was one of the aspects of AI proposed for study in the 1956 Dartmouth conference. Turing proposed a “child machine” which could be taught in the human manner to attain adult human-level intelligence. In latter days, the contention that an AI system could be built to learn and improve itself indefinitely has acquired the label of the bootstrap fallacy. Attempts in AI to implement such a system have met with consistent failure for half a century. Technological optimists, however, have maintained that a such system is possible, producing, if implemented, a feedback loop that would lead to a rapid exponential increase in intelligence. We examine the arguments for both positions and draw some conclusions. }} [http://mol-eng.com/bootstrap.pdf Self-archive]</ref> |
||
* [[Selmer Bringsjord]], The Logicist Manifesto<ref>{{cite journal|last=Bringsjord|first=Selmer|title=The Logicist Manifesto: At Long Last Let Logic-Based AI Become a Field Unto Itself|journal=Journal of Applied Logic|year=2008|month=December|volume=6|issue=4|pages=502--525| id = {{doi |10.1016/j.jal.2008.09.001}} |url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B758H-4THJGN7-1&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F2008&_rdoc=6&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info%28%23toc%2312927%232008%23999939995%23700611%23FLA%23display%23Volume%29&_cdi=12927&_sort=d&_docanchor=&_ct=15&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=7fc83ceaf3be566605e0e9d8a24b9283|accessdate=2010-06-10|authorlink=Selmer Bringsjord|quote=This paper is a sustained argument for the view that logic-based AI should become a self-contained field, entirely divorced from paradigms that are currently still included under the AI “umbrella”—paradigms such as connectionism and the continuous systems approach. The paper includes a self-contained summary of logic-based AI, as well as rebuttals to a number of objections that will inevitably be brought against the declaration of independence herein expressed.}}[http://kryten.mm.rpi.edu/SB_LAI_Manifesto_091808.pdf Self-archive]</ref> |
* [[Selmer Bringsjord]], The Logicist Manifesto<ref>{{cite journal|last=Bringsjord|first=Selmer|title=The Logicist Manifesto: At Long Last Let Logic-Based AI Become a Field Unto Itself|journal=Journal of Applied Logic|year=2008|month=December|volume=6|issue=4|pages=502--525| id = {{doi |10.1016/j.jal.2008.09.001}} |url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B758H-4THJGN7-1&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F2008&_rdoc=6&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info%28%23toc%2312927%232008%23999939995%23700611%23FLA%23display%23Volume%29&_cdi=12927&_sort=d&_docanchor=&_ct=15&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=7fc83ceaf3be566605e0e9d8a24b9283|accessdate=2010-06-10|authorlink=Selmer Bringsjord|quote=This paper is a sustained argument for the view that logic-based AI should become a self-contained field, entirely divorced from paradigms that are currently still included under the AI “umbrella”—paradigms such as connectionism and the continuous systems approach. The paper includes a self-contained summary of logic-based AI, as well as rebuttals to a number of objections that will inevitably be brought against the declaration of independence herein expressed.}}[http://kryten.mm.rpi.edu/SB_LAI_Manifesto_091808.pdf Self-archive]</ref> |
||
* [[Vincent Müller]], Is There a Future for AI Without Representation?<ref>{{cite journal|last=Müller|first=Vincent C.|title=Is There a Future for AI Without Representation? |journal=Minds and Machines|year=2007|month=March|volume=17|issue=1|pages=101-115|doi=10.1007/s11023-007-9067-1|url=http://www.springerlink.com/content/t65jk1h2705383l8/|accessdate=2010-06-10|quote=This paper investigates the prospects of Rodney Brooks’ proposal for AI without representation. It turns out that the supposedly characteristic features of “new AI” (embodiment, situatedness, absence of reasoning, and absence of representation) are all present in conventional systems: “New AI” is just like old AI. Brooks proposal boils down to the architectural rejection of central control in intelligent agents—Which, however, turns out to be crucial. Some of more recent cognitive science suggests that we might do well to dispose of the image of intelligent agents as central representation processors. If this paradigm shift is achieved, Brooks’ proposal for cognition without representation appears promising for full-blown intelligent agents—Though not for conscious agents.}}</ref> |
|||
* [[Vincent Muller]], Is There a Future for AI Without Representation? |
|||
* [[Kristinn R. Thórisson]], Integrated A.I. Systems |
* [[Kristinn R. Thórisson]], Integrated A.I. Systems |
||
Revision as of 00:11, 11 June 2010
AI@50, which is formally known as the "Dartmouth Artificial Intelligence Conference: The Next Fifty Years" (July 13–15, 2006), commemorated the 50th anniversary of the Dartmouth Conferences which effectively inaugurated the history of artificial intelligence. Five of the original ten attendees were present: Marvin Minsky, Ray Solomonoff, Oliver Selfridge, Trenchard More, and John McCarthy. [1] [2]
While sponsored by Dartmouth College, General Electric, and the Frederick Whittemore Foundation, a $200,000 grant from the US government called for a report of the proceedings that would:
- Analyze progress on AI's original challenges during the first 50 years, and assess whether the challenges were "easier" or "harder" than originally thought and, why
- Document what the AI@50 participants believe are the major research and development challenges facing this field over the next 50 years, and identify what breakthroughs will be needed to meet those challenges
- Relate those challenges and breakthroughs against developments and trends in other areas such as control theory, signal processing, information theory, statistics, and optimization theory.
Note
Many of the historic and distinguished AI researchers invited to present their papers at this conference may well deposit their taxpayer-funded papers in their individual or institutional repositories long before DARPA's official report is openly published on the Web or otherwise made freely available to the public, hence this page exists primarily to centralize links to the authors' sites and their self-archived papers.
Conference Program and links to published papers
- James Moor, conference Director, Introduction
- Carol Folt and Barry Scherr, Welcome
- Carey Heckman, Tonypandy and the Origins of Science
AI — Past, Present, Future
- John McCarthy, What Was Expected, What We Did, and AI Today
- Marvin Minsky, The Emotion Machine
The Future Model of Thinking
- Ron Brachman and Hector Levesque, A Large Part of Human Thought
- David Mumford, What is the Right Model for 'Thought'?
- Stuart Russell, The Approach of Modern AI
The Future of Network Models
- Geoffrey Hinton & Simon Osindero, From Pandemonium to Graphical Models and Back Again
- Rick Granger, From Brain Circuits to Mind Manufacture
The Future of Learning & Search
- Oliver Selfridge, Learning and Education for Software: New Approaches in Machine Learning
- Ray Solomonoff, Machine Learning — Past and Future [3]
- Leslie Pack Kaelbling, Learning to be Intelligent
- Peter Norvig, Web Search as a Product of and Catalyst for AI
The Future of AI
- Rod Brooks, Intelligence and Bodies
- Nils Nilsson, Routes to the Summit
- Eric Horvitz, In Pursuit of Artificial Intelligence: Reflections on Challenges and Trajectories
The Future of Vision
- Eric Grimson, Intelligent Medical Image Analysis: Computer Assisted Surgery and Disease Monitoring
- Takeo Kanade, Artificial Intelligence Vision: Progress and Non-Progress
- Terry Sejnowski, A Critique of Pure Vision
The Future of Reasoning
- Alan Bundy, Constructing, Selecting and Repairing Representations of Knowledge
- Edwina Rissland, The Exquisite Centrality of Examples
- Bart Selman, The Challenge and Promise of Automated Reasoning
The Future of Language and Cognition
- Trenchard More The Birth of Array Theory and Nial
- Eugene Charniak, Why Natural Language Processing is Now Statistical Natural Language Processing
- Pat Langley, Intelligent Behavior in Humans and Machines [4]
The Future of the Future
- Ray Kurzweil, Why We Can Be Confident of Turing Test Capability Within a Quarter Century [5]
- George Cybenko, The Future Trajectory of AI
- Charles Holland, DARPA's Perspective
AI and Games
- Jonathan Schaeffer, Games as a Test-bed for Artificial Intelligence Research"
- Danny Kopec, Chess and AI
- Shay Bushinsky, Principle Positions in Deep Junior's Development
Future Interactions with Intelligent Machines
- Daniela Rus, Making Bodies Smart
- Sherry Turkle, From Building Intelligences to Nurturing Sensibilities
Selected Submitted Papers: Future Strategies for AI
- J. Storrs Hall, Self-improving AI: An Analysis[6]
- Selmer Bringsjord, The Logicist Manifesto[7]
- Vincent Müller, Is There a Future for AI Without Representation?[8]
- Kristinn R. Thórisson, Integrated A.I. Systems
Selected Submitted Papers: Future Possibilities for AI
- Eric Steinhart, Survival as a Digital Ghost
- C.T.A. Schmidt, Did You Leave That 'Contraption' Alone With Your Little Sister?
- Michael Anderson[disambiguation needed] & Susan Leigh Anderson, The Status of Machine Ethics
- Marcello Guarini, Computation, Coherence, and Ethical Reasoning
Notes and comments
- Meg Houston Maker [1], conference notes:
- AI@50 Opening [2]
- AI — Past, Present Future [3] — Brief abstracts of papers by John McCarthy and Marvin Minsky
- The Future Model of Thinking [4] — Brief abstracts of papers by Ron Brachman , David Mumford, and Stuart Russell
- The Future of Network Models [5] — Brief abstracts of papers by Geoffrey Hinton and Simon Odinero, and Rick Granger
- The Future of Learning and Search [6] — Brief abstracts of papers by Oliver Selfridge, Ray Solomonoff, Leslie Pack Kaelbling, and Peter Norvig
- The Future of AI [7] — Brief abstracts of papers by Rod Brooks, Nils Nilsson, Eric Horvitz
- The Future of Vision [8] — Brief abstracts of papers by Eric Grimson, Takeo Kanade, and Terry Sejnowski
- The Future of Reasoning [9] :* Brief abstracts of papers by Alan Bundy, Edwina Rissland, and Bart Selman
- The Future of Language and Cognition [10] — Brief abstracts of papers by Trenchard More, Eugene Charniak, and Pat Langley
- The Future of the Future [11] :* Brief abstract of Ray Kurzweil's paper
- AI and Games [12] — Brief abstracts of papers by Jonathan Schaeffer and Danny Kopec
- Future Interactions with Intelligent Machines [13] — Brief abstracts of papers by Daniela Rus and Sherry Turkle
- Selected Submitted Papers: Future Strategies for AI [14] — Brief abstracts of papers by J. Storrs Hall and Selmer Bringsjord
- Selected Submitted Papers: Future Possibilities for AI [15] — Brief abstracts of papers by Eric Steinhart, C. T. A. Schmidt, and Michael Anderson[disambiguation needed] and Susan Leigh Anderson
- First Polling Question [16]
- Second Polling Question [17]
- Third Polling Question [18]
- Fourth Polling Question [19]
- Fifth Polling Question [20]
- Final Polling Question [23]
References
- ^ Moor, James (2006). "The Dartmouth College Artificial Intelligence Conference: The Next Fifty Years" (PDF). AI Magazine. 27 (4): 87–91.
- ^ Nilsson, Nils J. (2009). The Quest for Artificial Intelligence. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521122937.
{{cite book}}: More than one of|author=and|last=specified (help) pp. 80-81 - ^ Solomonoff, Ray J. (2006). "Machine Learning -- Past and Future" (PDF). Retrieved 2008-07-25.
{{cite news}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - ^ Langley, Pat (2006). "Intelligent Behavior in Humans and Machines" (PDF). Retrieved 2008-07-25.
{{cite news}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - ^ Kurzweil, Ray (2006-07-14). "Why We Can Be Confident of Turing Test Capability Within a Quarter Century". Retrieved 2006-07-25.
- ^ Hall, J. Stoors (2007). "Self-improving AI: An Analysis". Minds and Machines. 17 (3): 249–259. doi:10.1007/s11023-007-9065-3. Retrieved 2010-06-10.
Self-improvement was one of the aspects of AI proposed for study in the 1956 Dartmouth conference. Turing proposed a "child machine" which could be taught in the human manner to attain adult human-level intelligence. In latter days, the contention that an AI system could be built to learn and improve itself indefinitely has acquired the label of the bootstrap fallacy. Attempts in AI to implement such a system have met with consistent failure for half a century. Technological optimists, however, have maintained that a such system is possible, producing, if implemented, a feedback loop that would lead to a rapid exponential increase in intelligence. We examine the arguments for both positions and draw some conclusions.
Self-archive - ^ Bringsjord, Selmer (2008). "The Logicist Manifesto: At Long Last Let Logic-Based AI Become a Field Unto Itself". Journal of Applied Logic. 6 (4): 502--525. doi:10.1016/j.jal.2008.09.001. Retrieved 2010-06-10.
This paper is a sustained argument for the view that logic-based AI should become a self-contained field, entirely divorced from paradigms that are currently still included under the AI "umbrella"—paradigms such as connectionism and the continuous systems approach. The paper includes a self-contained summary of logic-based AI, as well as rebuttals to a number of objections that will inevitably be brought against the declaration of independence herein expressed.
{{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|month=ignored (help)Self-archive - ^ Müller, Vincent C. (2007). "Is There a Future for AI Without Representation?". Minds and Machines. 17 (1): 101–115. doi:10.1007/s11023-007-9067-1. Retrieved 2010-06-10.
This paper investigates the prospects of Rodney Brooks' proposal for AI without representation. It turns out that the supposedly characteristic features of "new AI" (embodiment, situatedness, absence of reasoning, and absence of representation) are all present in conventional systems: "New AI" is just like old AI. Brooks proposal boils down to the architectural rejection of central control in intelligent agents—Which, however, turns out to be crucial. Some of more recent cognitive science suggests that we might do well to dispose of the image of intelligent agents as central representation processors. If this paradigm shift is achieved, Brooks' proposal for cognition without representation appears promising for full-blown intelligent agents—Though not for conscious agents.
{{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|month=ignored (help)
External links
- Dartmouth Artificial Intelligence Conference: The Next Fifty Years, conference Web site
- Dartmouth receives grant from DARPA to support AI@50 conference, press release
- Artificial Intelligence: Past, Present, and Future, Vox of Dartmouth, 24 July 2006.
- Peter Norvig, Pictures from AI@50
