On the significance of Turing's test

2014 ◽  
Vol 57 (12) ◽  
pp. 8-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
CACM Staff
Keyword(s):  
Turing's Test

scholarly journals Deceptive Appearances: the Turing Test, Response-Dependence, and Intelligence as an Emotional Concept

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 513-532
Author(s):  
Michael Wheeler
Keyword(s):  
Actual World ◽  
Turing Test ◽  
Alternative Interpretation ◽  
Machine Intelligence ◽  
The Other ◽  
Philosophical Literature ◽  
Test Response ◽  
Response Dependence ◽  
Turing's Test

AbstractThe Turing Test is routinely understood as a behaviourist test for machine intelligence. Diane Proudfoot (Rethinking Turing’s Test, Journal of Philosophy, 2013) has argued for an alternative interpretation. According to Proudfoot, Turing’s claim that intelligence is what he calls ‘an emotional concept’ indicates that he conceived of intelligence in response-dependence terms. As she puts it: ‘Turing’s criterion for “thinking” is…: x is intelligent (or thinks) if in the actual world, in an unrestricted computer-imitates-human game, x appears intelligent to an average interrogator’. The role of the famous test is thus to provide the conditions in which to examine the average interrogator’s responses. I shall argue that Proudfoot’s analysis falls short. The philosophical literature contains two main models of response-dependence, what I shall call the transparency model and the reference-fixing model. Proudfoot resists the thought that Turing might have endorsed one of these models to the exclusion of the other. But the details of her own analysis indicate that she is, in fact, committed to the claim that Turing’s account of intelligence is grounded in a transparency model, rather than a reference-fixing one. By contrast, I shall argue that while Turing did indeed conceive of intelligence in response-dependence terms, his account is grounded in a reference-fixing model, rather than a transparency one. This is fortunate (for Turing), because, as an account of intelligence, the transparency model is arguably problematic in a way that the reference-fixing model isn’t.

Turing’s Test

2007 ◽  
pp. 119-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Copeland ◽  
Diane Proudfoot
Keyword(s):  
Turing's Test

Turing's test and the perils of psychohistory

1994 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 327-332
Author(s):  
James A. Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Turing's Test

scholarly journals Turing's test and conscious thought

1993 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Michie
Keyword(s):  
Conscious Thought ◽  
Turing's Test

Turing's test and believable AI in games

2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Livingstone
Keyword(s):  
Turing's Test

Turing's Test

2004 ◽  
pp. 77-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Davidson
Keyword(s):  
Turing's Test

Turing's Test and Believable AI

2008 ◽  
pp. 239-255
Author(s):  
Darryl Charles ◽  
Colin Fyfe ◽  
Daniel Livingstone ◽  
Stephen McGlinchey
Keyword(s):  
Physical Models ◽  
Limited Resources ◽  
Game Ai ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Body Shapes ◽  
Turing's Test

It is very evident that current progress in developing realistic and believable game AI lags behind that in developing realistic graphical and physical models. For example, in the years between the development of Neverwinter Nights by Bioware and the release of its sequel Neverwinter Nights 2 by Obsidian in collaboration with Bioware there were obvious and significant advances in the graphics. The character models in the first game are decidedly angular, the result of having limited resources to expend on the polygons required for simulating the appearance of natural curves and body shapes. No such problems now. A few years, and the difference is remarkable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document