A New Constructivist AI: From Manual Methods to Self-Constructive Systems

The development of artificial intelligence (AI) systems has to date been largely one of manual labor. This constructionist approach to AI has resulted in systems with limited-domain application and severe performance brittleness. No AI architecture to date incorporates, in a single system, the many features that make natural intelligence general-purpose, including system-wide attention, analogy-making, system-wide learning, and various other complex transversal functions. Going beyond current AI systems will require significantly more complex system architecture than attempted to date. The heavy reliance on direct human specification and intervention in constructionist AI brings severe theoretical and practical limitations to any system built that way. One way to address the challenge of artificial general intelligence (AGI) is replacing a top-down architectural design approach with methods that allow the system to manage its own growth. This calls for a fundamental shift from hand-crafting to self-organizing architectures and self-generated code – what we call a constructivist AI approach, in reference to the self-constructive principles on which it must be based. Methodologies employed for constructivist AI will be very different from today’s software development methods; instead of relying on direct design of mental functions and their implementation in a cog- nitive architecture, they must address the principles – the “seeds” – from which a cognitive architecture can automatically grow. In this paper I describe the argument in detail and examine some of the implications of this impending paradigm shift

Advanced Cyberinfrastructure for Science, Engineering, and Public Policy

Progress in many domains increasingly benefits from our ability to view the systems through a computational lens, i.e., using computational abstractions of the domains; and our ability to acquire, share, integrate, and analyze disparate types of data. These advances would not be possible without the advanced data and computational cyberinfrastructure and tools for data capture, integration, analysis, modeling, and simulation. However, despite, and perhaps because of, advances in "big data" technologies for data acquisition, management and analytics, the other largely manual, and labor-intensive aspects of the decision making process, e.g., formulating questions, designing studies, organizing, curating, connecting, correlating and integrating crossdomain data, drawing inferences and interpreting results, have become the rate-limiting steps to progress. Advancing the capability and capacity for evidence-based improvements in science, engineering, and public policy requires support for (1) computational abstractions of the relevant domains coupled with computational methods and tools for their analysis, synthesis, simulation, visualization, sharing, and integration; (2) cognitive tools that leverage and extend the reach of human intellect, and partner with humans on all aspects of the activity; (3) nimble and trustworthy data cyber-infrastructures that connect, manage a variety of instruments, multiple interrelated data types and associated metadata, data representations, processes, protocols and workflows; and enforce applicable security and data access and use policies; and (4) organizational and social structures and processes for collaborative and coordinated activity across disciplinary and institutional boundaries.Comment: A Computing Community Consortium (CCC) white paper, 9 pages. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1604.0200

The challenge of complexity for cognitive systems

Complex cognition addresses research on (a) high-level cognitive processes – mainly problem solving, reasoning, and decision making – and their interaction with more basic processes such as perception, learning, motivation and emotion and (b) cognitive processes which take place in a complex, typically dynamic, environment. Our focus is on AI systems and cognitive models dealing with complexity and on psychological findings which can inspire or challenge cognitive systems research. In this overview we first motivate why we have to go beyond models for rather simple cognitive processes and reductionist experiments. Afterwards, we give a characterization of complexity from our perspective. We introduce the triad of cognitive science methods – analytical, empirical, and engineering methods – which in our opinion have all to be utilized to tackle complex cognition. Afterwards we highlight three aspects of complex cognition – complex problem solving, dynamic decision making, and learning of concepts, skills and strategies. We conclude with some reflections about and challenges for future research

Autonomic computing architecture for SCADA cyber security

Cognitive computing relates to intelligent computing platforms that are based on the disciplines of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and other innovative technologies. These technologies can be used to design systems that mimic the human brain to learn about their environment and can autonomously predict an impending anomalous situation. IBM first used the term ‘Autonomic Computing’ in 2001 to combat the looming complexity crisis (Ganek and Corbi, 2003). The concept has been inspired by the human biological autonomic system. An autonomic system is self-healing, self-regulating, self-optimising and self-protecting (Ganek and Corbi, 2003). Therefore, the system should be able to protect itself against both malicious attacks and unintended mistakes by the operator

Hard to Cheat: A Turing Test based on Answering Questions about Images

Progress in language and image understanding by machines has sparkled the interest of the research community in more open-ended, holistic tasks, and refueled an old AI dream of building intelligent machines. We discuss a few prominent challenges that characterize such holistic tasks and argue for "question answering about images" as a particular appealing instance of such a holistic task. In particular, we point out that it is a version of a Turing Test that is likely to be more robust to over-interpretations and contrast it with tasks like grounding and generation of descriptions. Finally, we discuss tools to measure progress in this field.Comment: Presented in AAAI-15 Workshop: Beyond the Turing Tes

Born to learn: The inspiration, progress, and future of evolved plastic artificial neural networks

Biological plastic neural networks are systems of extraordinary computational capabilities shaped by evolution, development, and lifetime learning. The interplay of these elements leads to the emergence of adaptive behavior and intelligence. Inspired by such intricate natural phenomena, Evolved Plastic Artificial Neural Networks (EPANNs) use simulated evolution in-silico to breed plastic neural networks with a large variety of dynamics, architectures, and plasticity rules: these artificial systems are composed of inputs, outputs, and plastic components that change in response to experiences in an environment. These systems may autonomously discover novel adaptive algorithms, and lead to hypotheses on the emergence of biological adaptation. EPANNs have seen considerable progress over the last two decades. Current scientific and technological advances in artificial neural networks are now setting the conditions for radically new approaches and results. In particular, the limitations of hand-designed networks could be overcome by more flexible and innovative solutions. This paper brings together a variety of inspiring ideas that define the field of EPANNs. The main methods and results are reviewed. Finally, new opportunities and developments are presented