+ BICA Challenge Panel Discussion Session 1 BICA VideoPanels * May 5, 2011 A virtual extension of BICA 2011 Panelists: Andrea Stocco University of Washington Seattle, WA, USA Antonio Chella University of Palermo, Italy Brandon Rohrer Sandia National Labs, Albuquerque, NM, USA Host: Alexei Samsonovich

+ Title: BICA Challenge Agenda: 1. The challenge of making a step in technology from the present state of the art to a human level of intelligence is inspired by the phenomenon of the human mind, and in this sense it is biologically inspired. Then, there seem to be reasons to expect that the first solution to this challenge will be found in the form of a cognitive architecture. Therefore, let us call it "BICA Challenge". Does this make sense? 2. What should we expect in AI in the near future: a big breakthrough, a steady incremental progress, a plateau, a decline, a catastrophe? 3. Is it true that researchers can or even should forget about the brain when designing creative machines? 4. It seems that the ability to learn like a human starting from nearly zero knowledge about the world implies the ability to become intelligent like a human child, teenager or adult, within the same or shorter time interval. Is this argument sound - or there is a flaw in it? 5. Computational powers available today approach or exceed the level of the human brain in information storage and processing. Many narrow superhuman capabilities have been achieved in AI (well-known examples include chess, Jeopardy). Virtually every element of human cognition and learning seems to have been paved with computational models in cognitive psychology, neuroscience and intelligent tutoring systems. Why then computers are still generally clueless and require human assistance at every step beyond their limited programs?

+ Question 1 The challenge of making a step in technology from the present state of the art to a human level of intelligence is inspired by the phenomenon of the human mind, and in this sense it is biologically inspired. Then, there are reasons to expect that the first solution to this challenge will be found in the form of a cognitive architecture. Therefore, let us call it "BICA Challenge". Does this make sense?

+ Question 2 What should we expect in AI in the near future: a big breakthrough, a steady incremental progress, a plateau, a decline, a catastrophe?

+ Question 3 Is a dialogue across communities possible? Can it be productive? Should knowledge about the brain be used in design of creative machines? Here are contra-arguments from an undisclosed correspondent: (a) "Most people who think brain modeling is important simply cannot understand how it's possible to explain intelligence at a higher level of abstraction, so I'm not sure the discussion would be productive.." (b) "Many AI researchers, even those with deep interest in human cognition, think that we can understand the mind without incorporating results from neuroscience... I assure you that many of us feel exactly that way."

+ Question 4 It seems that the ability to learn like a human starting from nearly zero knowledge about the world implies the ability to become intelligent like a human child, teenager and adult, within the same or shorter time frame. Is this argument sound - or there is a flaw in it?

+ Question 5 Computational powers available today approach or exceed the level of the human brain in information storage and processing. Many narrow superhuman capabilities have been achieved in AI (well-known examples include chess, Jeopardy). Virtually every element of human cognition and learning seems to have been paved with computational models in cognitive psychology, neuroscience and intelligent tutoring systems. Why then computers are still generally clueless and require human assistance at every step beyond their limited programs?