Quote: Original post by Timkin

Quote: Original post by vmatikainen
Let me think this from an opposite point of view. The illusion of intelligence is actually in the mind of the beholder. I say it is not the attribute of the entity, but the observer. So actually there are two things to consider.

I don't see why that is the 'opposite point of view'. That's the very perspective I'm attempting to convey... that an illusion is a property of observation... and in this case, the illusion is to do with intelligence (and whether intelligence is present or not is irrelevant).

Sorry Bob, but I don't know who you are in RL, nor am I familiar with your article. I'm re-writing a 3rd year university course on AI for Autonomous Agents (which is given concurrently to robotics students and game development students). Do you have a link to your article? If you've considered this issue previously, I'd be interested in reading your work.

Cheers,

Timkin

http://www.aiwisdom.com/byresource_aiwisdom.html

Haven't been on these boards in a while... ;-)

Quote: Original post by eeaiguy2
http://www.aiwisdom.com/byresource_aiwisdom.html

Haven't been on these boards in a while... ;-)

Hehe...now I know why both your name and pseudonym were vaguely familiar! ;) Unfortunately I loaned my copy of Game AI Wisdom to a programmer friend some time ago and never got it back (and I haven't seen him in years)... I'll have to chase up another copy and check out the article. 8)

Quote: Original post by Timkin

The 'illusion of intelligence' is the perception of an appropriate change of behaviour of another entity, induced by an external cause.

The 'illusion of intelligence' is where something looks intelligent, but isn't.

You'll just confuse them with your version. It's basically saying ' intelligence is is an appropriate change of behavior, induced by an external cause'. That's a fuzzy stab at philosophy. You are not teaching philosophy, are you?

An intelligence act is something that required thinking (and if you need more that that, use the dictionary definition, don't just make something up). It's an illusion if the entity seems to have done a lot more thinking than it actually did.

Quote: Original post by Cowboy Coder
The 'illusion of intelligence' is where something looks intelligent, but isn't.

You're implying a lot more here than is necessary. We're discussing illusion as a perception, not with regards to what is actually going on. So, saying that intelligence is not present is stating more than is necessary to discuss the issues regarding the observer.

Quote: You'll just confuse them with your version.

Who says its 'my' version? You're suggesting I'm just making something up (which in and of itself isn't a bad thing) and throwing it at an audience without justification or validation. The discussion of intelligence as an illusory psychological concept is extremely prevalent in the literature.

Quote: It's basically saying ' intelligence is is an appropriate change of behavior, induced by an external cause'.

No, it's certainly not saying that. You're applying your own perceptions and understandings to what I said and coming up with that interpretation.

Quote: That's a fuzzy stab at philosophy. You are not teaching philosophy, are you?

Actually, I have studied an awful lot on the philosphy of mind (and philosphy of science), but no, this is not a philophy subject. However, this is a university subject (as opposed to a technical college subject) and that means that I challenge my students to think about what it is they're doing, rather than merely implement it in code. This, specifically, is a subject on AI for Autonomous Agents and tackles two central issues while presenting the tools for autonomy: 1) when we want artificial agents to act intelligently; and, 2) when we want artificial agents to be perceived as acting intelligently. The former is most relevant to my engineering (mechatronics/robotics) students and the latter to my IT (Games) students. However, both require an understanding of the other perspective, because we often have engineers build robots for entertainment and Games developers often end up working in other industries. In the end they have to produce actual systems showing both, so it's important that they understand the philophy behind the methodology.

Quote: An intelligence act is something that required thinking

My heater thermostat thinks, but I wouldn't call it intelligent. Thinking is not the basis of intelligence, it is merely a cognitive activity.

Personally, I believe that the illusion of intelligence is any entity capable of performing actions or reactions in which 2 requirements are met:

1. The perceiver cannot confidently predict the action/reaction of the entity based on a perceived input.
2. The action/reaction must eventually be logical to the perceiver. (Meaning the perceiver may have to learn about the wants/needs of the entity before being able to determine whether the entity has the illusion of intelligence. For instance, if you never knew a fish cannot effectively breath out of water, but knew that you could not breath in the water, it might seem like an illogical action to jump into the water to breath until you understood the entities wants/needs)

Quote: Original post by Timkin
We're discussing illusion as a perception, not with regards to what is actually going on. So, saying that intelligence is not present is stating more than is necessary to discuss the issues regarding the observer.

I missed this earlier, I'm sorry, but you really are going to confuse them. Perhaps that is your intent - confuse them so they have to think?

The confusing thing here is your use of the word "illusion". Something is an illusion if the perception is demonstrably at odds with reality. Like if you see two lines, one of which looks longer than the other, when in fact they are measurably the same length, then that's an illusion.

It only makes sense to discuss something as an illusion with reference to what is actually going on, so you can establish the cognitive disconnect. If you are discussing illusion as perception, then why not say "the perception of intelligence", or "the appearance of intelligence"?

http://m-w.com/dictionary/illusion
Main Entry: illusion
2 a (1) : a misleading image presented to the vision (2) : something that deceives or misleads intellectually b (1) : perception of something objectively existing in such a way as to cause misinterpretation of its actual nature

Quote: Original post by Cowboy Coder

It only makes sense to discuss something as an illusion with reference to what is actually going on, so you can establish the cognitive disconnect. If you are discussing illusion as perception, then why not say "the perception of intelligence", or "the appearance of intelligence"?

That's a reasonable point... and to a certain degree I am talking about the 'perception of intelligence'. However, that term would usually be interpreted as the existence of intelligence and the subsequent subjective perceptions of that reality; that is, the entity is intelligent but we may or may not perceive this given their actions.

There certainly may be a more appropriate term than 'illusion of intelligence', but what I really want to convey and have my students think about is the possiblity of perceiving intelligence without regard to whether it exists or not. So in that sense, there are two possibilities: the circumstance that the perception is illusory (i.e., they perceive something that doesn't exist) and the circumstance that the perception conveys reality (they perceive something that does exist).

Indeed, I want them to explore how both of these perceptions might arise and subsequently how we might manipulate the perceptions of the observer to create an illusion, just as a stage performer may do the same thing. After all, that is the art of game AI! ;)