An Essay concerning machine understanding

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.01840v1
• Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 04:12:43 GMT
• Title: An Essay concerning machine understanding
• Authors: Herbert L. Roitblat,
• Abstract summary: This essay describes how we could go about constructing a machine capable of understanding. To understand a word is to know and be able to work with the underlying concepts for which it is an indicator.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Artificial intelligence systems exhibit many useful capabilities, but they appear to lack understanding. This essay describes how we could go about constructing a machine capable of understanding. As John Locke (1689) pointed out words are signs for ideas, which we can paraphrase as thoughts and concepts. To understand a word is to know and be able to work with the underlying concepts for which it is an indicator. Understanding between a speaker and a listener occurs when the speaker casts his or her concepts into words and the listener recovers approximately those same concepts. Current models rely on the listener to construct any potential meaning. The diminution of behaviorism as a psychological paradigm and the rise of cognitivism provide examples of many experimental methods that can be used to determine whether and to what extent a machine might understand and to make suggestions about how that understanding might be instantiated.

Related papers

• SIFToM: Robust Spoken Instruction Following through Theory of Mind [51.326266354164716]
  We present a cognitively inspired model, Speech Instruction Following through Theory of Mind (SIFToM), to enable robots to pragmatically follow human instructions under diverse speech conditions. Results show that the SIFToM model outperforms state-of-the-art speech and language models, approaching human-level accuracy on challenging speech instruction following tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-17T02:36:10Z)
• Machine learning and information theory concepts towards an AI Mathematician [77.63761356203105]
  The current state-of-the-art in artificial intelligence is impressive, especially in terms of mastery of language, but not so much in terms of mathematical reasoning. This essay builds on the idea that current deep learning mostly succeeds at system 1 abilities. It takes an information-theoretical posture to ask questions about what constitutes an interesting mathematical statement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-07T15:12:06Z)
• Do Artificial Intelligence Systems Understand? [0.0]
  It is not necessary to attribute understanding to a machine in order to explain its exhibited "intelligent" behavior. A merely syntactic and mechanistic approach to intelligence as a task-solving tool suffices to justify the range of operations that it can display.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-22T13:57:02Z)
• Diagnosing AI Explanation Methods with Folk Concepts of Behavior [70.10183435379162]
  We consider "success" to depend not only on what information the explanation contains, but also on what information the human explainee understands from it. We use folk concepts of behavior as a framework of social attribution by the human explainee.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-27T00:19:41Z)
• Towards Relatable Explainable AI with the Perceptual Process [5.581885362337179]
  We argue that explanations must be more relatable to other concepts, hypotheticals, and associations. Inspired by cognitive psychology, we propose the XAI Perceptual Processing Framework and RexNet model for relatable explainable AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-28T05:48:53Z)
• My Teacher Thinks The World Is Flat! Interpreting Automatic Essay Scoring Mechanism [71.34160809068996]
  Recent work shows that automated scoring systems are prone to even common-sense adversarial samples. We utilize recent advances in interpretability to find the extent to which features such as coherence, content and relevance are important for automated scoring mechanisms. We also find that since the models are not semantically grounded with world-knowledge and common sense, adding false facts such as the world is flat'' actually increases the score instead of decreasing it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-27T06:19:20Z)
• Inductive Biases for Deep Learning of Higher-Level Cognition [108.89281493851358]
  A fascinating hypothesis is that human and animal intelligence could be explained by a few principles. This work considers a larger list, focusing on those which concern mostly higher-level and sequential conscious processing. The objective of clarifying these particular principles is that they could potentially help us build AI systems benefiting from humans' abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-30T18:29:25Z)
• Bongard-LOGO: A New Benchmark for Human-Level Concept Learning and Reasoning [78.13740873213223]
  Bongard problems (BPs) were introduced as an inspirational challenge for visual cognition in intelligent systems. We propose a new benchmark Bongard-LOGO for human-level concept learning and reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-02T03:19:46Z)
• Machine Semiotics [0.0]
  For speech assistive devices, the learning of machine-specific meanings of human utterances appears to be sufficient. Using the quite trivial example of a cognitive heating device, we show that this process can be formalized as the reinforcement learning of utterance-meaning pairs (UMP)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-24T15:49:54Z)
• (Re)construing Meaning in NLP [15.37817898307963]
  We show that the way something is expressed reflects different ways of conceptualizing or construing the information being conveyed. We show how insights from construal could inform theoretical and practical work in NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-18T21:21:34Z)
• Can you hear me $\textit{now}$? Sensitive comparisons of human and machine perception [3.8580784887142774]
  We explore how this asymmetry can cause comparisons to misestimate the overlap in human and machine perception. In five experiments, we adapt task designs from the human psychophysics literature to show that even when subjects cannot freely transcribe such speech commands, they often can demonstrate other forms of understanding. We recommend the adoption of such "sensitive tests" when comparing human and machine perception.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-27T16:24:08Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.