This talk page is semi-protected due to an unmanageable torrent of edits from people who think this is where you may ask a chatbot a question. It is not. If you cannot edit this page and want to request an edit that is about improving the article, make an edit request instead.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Artificial Intelligence, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Artificial intelligence on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Artificial IntelligenceWikipedia:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceTemplate:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceArtificial Intelligence
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cognitive science, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Cognitive scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Cognitive scienceTemplate:WikiProject Cognitive scienceCognitive science
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human–Computer Interaction, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Human–Computer InteractionWikipedia:WikiProject Human–Computer InteractionTemplate:WikiProject Human–Computer InteractionHuman–Computer Interaction
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Artificial intelligence is part of WikiProject Transhumanism, which aims to organize, expand, clean up, and guide Transhumanism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page for more details.TranshumanismWikipedia:WikiProject TranshumanismTemplate:WikiProject TranshumanismTranshumanism
Add Transhumanism navigation template on the bottom of all transhumanism articles; (use {{Transhumanism}} or see navigation template)
Add Transhumanism info box to all transhumanism related talk pages (use {{Wpa}} or see info box)
Add [[Category:transhumanism]] to the bottom of all transhumanism related articles, so it shows up on the list of transhumanism articles
Maintenance / Etc
Find/cite sources for all positions of an article (see citing sources.
Try to expand stubs, however, some "new" articles may be neologisms, as this is common with positions on theories on life and may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process)
Watch the list of transhumanism related articles and add to accordingly (see transhumanism articles)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Spring 2015. Further details were available on the "Education Program:California State University, Channel Islands/Ethics for a Free World (Spring 2015)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.
It is striking that the paragraph beginning "High-profile applications of AI include..." mentions several Google products, but doesn't mention ChatGPT.
Does this article need an overhaul? Furius (talk) 18:43, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it seems outdated. We could potentially replace "virtual assistants (e.g., Google Assistant, Siri, and Alexa)" to instead mention modern chatbots or LLMs.
I believe this sentence is also outdated: "However, many AI applications are not perceived as such: "A lot of cutting-edge AI has filtered into general applications, often without being called AI because once something becomes useful enough and common enough it's not labeled AI anymore."" This was relevant in the 2000s, when people avoided the term "AI" as it still carried stigma from the overpromises and the AI winters (see the AI effect). But nowadays, the term AI is widely used and the trend may even have reversed. Alenoach (talk) 09:19, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Removed subsection "Substitute for human interaction"
This added subsection appears to be AI-generated (flagged as 100% AI-generated by all three AI content detectors I tried, GPTZero, ZeroGPT and copyleaks.com). I don't think this is a false positive because the initial version of the article Illusion of understanding by the same contributor ElliotSvenssonPE was also AI-generated. I checked Salles et al. and it doesn't seem to support the specific claims being made about users disclosing personal information more readily to AI systems or preferring them in situations involving embarrassment or vulnerability. Some other sources seem too old for supporting the corresponding statements. I also think using the term "illusion of understanding" isn't neutral as it assumes that there is no real understanding, and the question of whether modern chatbots understand is debated and depends on how you define "understanding" (see Talk:Illusion_of_understanding#POV_and_scope_of_the_article). Alenoach (talk) 07:12, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I readily admit the text was 100% AI-generated, but it's not what I wouldn't have written. Even so, sourcing issues are totally real: one of the original references that Copilot gave me was a complete fake (or else it was methodically scrubbed from the Internet, including the Wayback Machine). Therefore I consider this a lesson in lazy Wikipedia contributing and won't allow the same thing to happen again.
As for the issues of POV, I think the point is a true point and well-supported by the sources, and even if that is far from a consensus it doesn't seem at all clear to me that these sources and their ideas must therefore be censored. ElliotSvenssonPE (talk) 17:25, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Outdated sentence?
Hi @ApLundell. I saw that you disagree on whether this sentence is outdated. My understanding is that in the 2000s, using the term "AI" was often avoided, as there was still some stigma from overpromises of the AI winter. Nowadays, the term AI is broadly used. Companies are rather incentivized to indicate that their product is AI-powered. The examples of applications that the source gives, "search engines, bank software for processing transactions and in medical diagnosis" are generally not something that companies would avoid branding as AI as long as there is some machine learning involved.
Regardless, I don't think the CNN source remains applicable: it's from 2006, and the situation two decades later is very different. So I think the quote should be dropped.
The crux of my argument that that, as described in this article, AI is an entire field of study, and over the past few years that field has grown, but the type of thing that's regularly described as "AI" has shrunk. The aspects of the field that were incorrectly not thought of as AI when that source was written are still not thought of as AI. If anything we've only added to the bucket of things that computer scientists consider to be with within the AI field, but are not normally described that way. ApLundell (talk) 02:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As this is only given half a paragraph in the body of the article, placing it in the lead is premature. This should be more clearly explained with better sources and without editorializing and without unattributed quotes before being re-added to the lead. Being out-dated does matter, per WP:AGEMATTERS, but sourcing, editorializing/WP:OR, and weight issues also need to be cleared. Grayfell (talk) 09:26, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The CNN source seems fine. It is still true that there are many previous, more commonplace AI systems that often don't get labeled as AI because people often think AI has to be newer, more cutting-edge. This is in part because a common thinking is what Alenoach describes, where people mistakenly think that something is "AI as long as there is some machine learning involved," when reality is that there are many types of AI beyond and before machine learning. So, yes, the CNN source as well as the idea attributed to it could be kept, could be supported by other more recent sources, and as Grayfall says could likely be expanded in the body of the article before considered for the lead. I honestly would have removed the list of products (Netflix, Alexa, Waymo, etc.) from the lead before I removed this description that there are common misperceptions of what is and isn't AI. Asparagusstar (talk) 22:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There's too much WP:OR in the article, and in the wider topic on Wikipedia. If it's still true now, we need to start from reliable, modern sources. We cannot start from what we know to be "true" and work backwards. That's too sloppy.
The opinions of Nick Bostrom in 2006 would, at bare minimum, need to be contextualized as the opinions of Nick Bostrom in 2006, not presented without attribution as a simple statement of fact, and especially not in the lead. Grayfell (talk) 01:01, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 March 2026 and 15 May 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Natusiamaczek (article contribs).
Should this article have a more detailed overview of symbolic artificial intelligence?
@Alenoach: Because this article hardly mentions any algorithms used in automated reasoning, I added several excerpts about these algorithms (which have been removed).
The "Techniques" section is a dense summary of the existing techniques. And the section's coverage of logic and state space search is already significant relative to the overall field, which has become dominated by machine learning. There is also already a sentence that roughly illustrates the concepts of forward and backward chaining and provides links: "In the case of Horn clauses, problem-solving search can be performed by reasoning forwards from the premises or backwards from the problem."
I'm concerned that concepts like unification and the DPLL algorithm are difficult to understand (especially for people who don't have a technical background) and not helpful for non-expert readers interested in things like how ChatGPT and other modern AI models work.
level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.jpg){kind=small}
The redirect Decomputing has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 24 § Decomputing until a consensus is reached. मल्ल (talk) 16:10, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 March 2026 and 15 May 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Natusiamaczek (article contribs).