Objectivity and personal involvement in artificial intelligence: An examination of the Turing Test

Abstract

The aim of this report is to study what an intelligent system entails. The study focuses on what makes natural intelligent system. This will be important in that it will form a guideline for the construction of artificial intelligent systems. This study examines in-depth the Turing Test, and establishes the difficulties which can be encountered by the strong follows of this test. The study also goes further to illustrate an alternative test for intelligence in an entity. Turing demonstrated the test by describing a parlour game. He started by saying that a man and a woman are in two separate rooms and communicate with an interrogator only by means of a teletype. The interrogator need to identify the man and the woman and in order to do so, he/she may ask any question capable of being transmitted by teletype. So, the >: man tries to convince the interrogator that he is the woman, while the woman tries to communicate her real identity. At a given point in time during the game, the man is replaced by a machine. if the interrogator remains unable to distinguish the machine from the woman, the machine will be said to have passed the test and we will say that the machine is intelligent. This study identifies three limitations with the Turing Test: First is the Achievement Problem. By the time Turing was proposing this test, AI was at its infancy. Then, Turing went ahead to propose contest between the infant AI (machine) and the human person who had at that time really developed his/her intelligence to quite a high level. Second Problem is The Fuzzism of Intelligence. It is not true that for any subject to be termed as intelligence, it has to defeat a human person's intelligence. Other animals exercise intelligence too, for instance a baboon that peals a banana before eating it. Third is The Problem of Missing Standards. According to Turing Test, there are some essential features, which ought to have been included, and which may lead the whole exercise to a complexion. For instance there was the need of standardization of the test situation, which he failed to do. These limitations are discussed in details later on and an alternative solution test provided to overcome these limitations. My approach for the test of the intelligence of an entity divides the test into two levels. The first level looks at an entity and its constructional components. The second level analyses the action of the entity that is usually manifested by its components.