1. The Turing Test: the first 50 years Robert M. French Trends in Cognitive Science, Vol. 4, No. 3, March 2000 Summarized by Eun Seok Lee BI. 2008. 4. 14.

2. Outlines The value and the history of the TT Arguments around the Test Considerations on intelligence itself Variations on the Test BI. 2008. 4. 14. 2/8

3. TT’s Contributions Theoretical: developed a simple mathematical model for a universal computing machine Practical: developed one of the first electronic, programmable, digital computers Philosophical: provided an elegant operational definition of thinking that set the entire field of AI – ‘the Imitation Game’ (Mind 59, 1950) BI. 2008. 4. 14. 3/8

4. Imitation Game (the Turing Test) No reason to deny intelligence to a machine that could imitate a human’s unrestricted conversation Only to provide a sufficient condition for intelligence – Many humans also fail. First realistic chance of actual achieving the goal of mechanized thought The very essence: Our judgment of how well machines act like humans – ‘To what extent do machines have to act like humans before it becomes immoral to damage or destroy them?’ BI. 2008. 4. 14. 4/8

5. Shift in Perception of the TT Too much high optimism – Simon and Newell (1958), Minsky (1967)… The debate: “is it a sufficient condition for intelligence or not?” – Minsky (1982)’s statement Turing’s comments on: – Mathematical objection based on Goedel’s Theorem – Objection from literature on ‘Consciousness,’ or ‘problem of other minds’ – Lady Lovelace’s objection: “Machines can only do what we know how to order it to do.” BI. 2008. 4. 14. 5/8

6. Combinatorial Explosion: Block (1981) and Searle (1980) Block: “the Test is just for behavior” – Objection: For an hour’s test, it needs 10 1500 20-word strings – i.e. “Does the word splugpud sound very pretty to you?” Searle: ‘the Chinese Room thought experiment’ – Objection: All answers must be stored in the room – i.e. “Would the last character in this question be likely to embarrass a very shy young woman?” with a distorted but clearly recognizable manner for native Chinese BI. 2008. 4. 14. 6/8

7. Harnard’s Total Turing Test (1991, 1994) t1: The ‘toy-model’, or low level. Current AI T2: Turing’s original. Symbols-in/out manner T3: ‘Screen’ is removed. Robotic. Physically indistinguishable. Mental semantics must be ‘grounded.’ Meanings from interactions with the external environment. T4: ‘Microfunctional Indistinguishability.’ Down to the neuron and neurotransmitter. T5: ‘Grand Unified Theories of Everything.’ Down to the last electron. Intelligence must be embodied into environments BI. 2008. 4. 14. 7/8

8. Variations on the Theme: Questions on the Intelligence Mitchie’s ‘Superarticulacy’ (1993) – Assuming completely rule-based intelligence – Human ability to know without being able to articulate that knowledge Watt’s Inverted Turing Test (1996) – From ‘naïve psychology’ to ascribe other humans’ mind – The machine should distinguish a human from a machine Loebner Prize – Colby’s PARRY: A paranoid schizophrenic – Weizenbaum’s ELIZA: A psychiatrist’s discussion – Minsky’s offering BI. 2008. 4. 14. 8/8