The next 50 years: A personal view
I review history, starting with Turing’s seminal paper, reaching back ultimately to when our species started to outperform other primates, searching for the questions that will help us develop a computational account of human intelligence. I answer that the right questions are: What’s different betw...
| Huvudupphovsman: | |
|---|---|
| Materialtyp: | Artikel |
| Språk: | en_US |
| Publicerad: |
© Elsevier B.V.
2022
|
| Ämnen: | |
| Länkar: | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bica.2012.03.002 https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/141676 |
| _version_ | 1826202191622307840 |
|---|---|
| author | Winston, Patrick Henry |
| author_facet | Winston, Patrick Henry |
| author_sort | Winston, Patrick Henry |
| collection | MIT |
| description | I review history, starting with Turing’s seminal paper, reaching back ultimately to when our species started to outperform other primates, searching for the questions that will help us develop a computational account of human intelligence. I answer that the right questions are: What’s different between us and the other primates and what’s the same. I answer the what’s different question by saying that we became symbolic in a way that enabled story understanding, directed perception, and easy communication, and other species did not. I argue against Turing’s reasoning-centered suggestions, offering that reasoning is just a special case of story understanding. I answer the what’s the same question by noting that our brains are largely engineered in the same exotic way, with information flowing in all directions at once. By way of example, I illustrate how these answers can influence a research program, describing the Genesis system, a system that works with short summaries of stories, provided in English, together with low-level common-sense rules and higher-level concept patterns, likewise expressed in English. Genesis answers questions, notes abstract concepts such as revenge, tells stories in a listener-aware way, and fills in story gaps using precedents. I conclude by suggesting, optimistically, that a genuine computational theory of human intelligence will emerge in the next 50 years if we stick to the right, biologically inspired questions, and work toward biologically informed models. |
| first_indexed | 2024-09-23T12:03:56Z |
| format | Article |
| id | mit-1721.1/141676 |
| institution | Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| language | en_US |
| last_indexed | 2024-09-23T12:03:56Z |
| publishDate | 2022 |
| publisher | © Elsevier B.V. |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | mit-1721.1/1416762022-04-07T03:24:24Z The next 50 years: A personal view Winston, Patrick Henry Biologically inspired cognitive models human intelligence evolution of intelligence inner language story understanding directed perception exotic engineering I review history, starting with Turing’s seminal paper, reaching back ultimately to when our species started to outperform other primates, searching for the questions that will help us develop a computational account of human intelligence. I answer that the right questions are: What’s different between us and the other primates and what’s the same. I answer the what’s different question by saying that we became symbolic in a way that enabled story understanding, directed perception, and easy communication, and other species did not. I argue against Turing’s reasoning-centered suggestions, offering that reasoning is just a special case of story understanding. I answer the what’s the same question by noting that our brains are largely engineered in the same exotic way, with information flowing in all directions at once. By way of example, I illustrate how these answers can influence a research program, describing the Genesis system, a system that works with short summaries of stories, provided in English, together with low-level common-sense rules and higher-level concept patterns, likewise expressed in English. Genesis answers questions, notes abstract concepts such as revenge, tells stories in a listener-aware way, and fills in story gaps using precedents. I conclude by suggesting, optimistically, that a genuine computational theory of human intelligence will emerge in the next 50 years if we stick to the right, biologically inspired questions, and work toward biologically informed models. This material is based on work supported by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, Grant No. N00014-09-1-0597. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations therein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Naval Research. 2022-04-06T06:08:53Z 2022-04-06T06:08:53Z 2012-04-24 Article https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bica.2012.03.002 https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/141676 Winston, P. H. (2012). The next 50 years: A personal view. Biologically Inspired Cognitive Architectures, 1 (July 2012), 92–99. en_US Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/ application/pdf © Elsevier B.V. |
| spellingShingle | Biologically inspired cognitive models human intelligence evolution of intelligence inner language story understanding directed perception exotic engineering Winston, Patrick Henry The next 50 years: A personal view |
| title | The next 50 years: A personal view |
| title_full | The next 50 years: A personal view |
| title_fullStr | The next 50 years: A personal view |
| title_full_unstemmed | The next 50 years: A personal view |
| title_short | The next 50 years: A personal view |
| title_sort | next 50 years a personal view |
| topic | Biologically inspired cognitive models human intelligence evolution of intelligence inner language story understanding directed perception exotic engineering |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bica.2012.03.002 https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/141676 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT winstonpatrickhenry thenext50yearsapersonalview AT winstonpatrickhenry next50yearsapersonalview |