Learning, Social Intelligence and the Turing Test - why an "out-of-the-box" Turing Machine will not pass the Turing Test

The Turing Test (TT) checks for human intelligence, rather than any putative general intelligence. It involves repeated interaction requiring learning in the form of adaption to the human conversation partner. It is a macro-level post-hoc test in contrast to the definition of a Turing Machine (TM), which is a prior micro-level definition. This raises the question of whether learning is just another computational process, i.e. can be implemented as a TM. Here we argue that learning or adaption is fundamentally different from computation, though it does involve processes that can be seen as computations. To illustrate this difference we compare (a) designing a TM and (b) learning a TM, defining them for the purpose of the argument. We show that there is a well-defined sequence of problems which are not effectively designable but are learnable, in the form of the bounded halting problem. Some characteristics of human intelligence are reviewed including it's: interactive nature, learning abilities, imitative tendencies, linguistic ability and context-dependency. A story that explains some of these is the Social Intelligence Hypothesis. If this is broadly correct, this points to the necessity of a considerable period of acculturation (social learning in context) if an artificial intelligence is to pass the TT. Whilst it is always possible to 'compile' the results of learning into a TM, this would not be a designed TM and would not be able to continually adapt (pass future TTs). We conclude three things, namely that: a purely "designed" TM will never pass the TT; that there is no such thing as a general intelligence since it necessary involves learning; and that learning/adaption and computation should be clearly distinguished.Comment: 10 pages, invited talk at Turing Centenary Conference CiE 2012, special session on "The Turing Test and Thinking Machines

Dynamical strategies for obstacle avoidance during Dictyostelium discoideum aggregation: a Multi-agent system model

Chemotaxis, the movement of an organism in response to chemical stimuli, is a typical feature of many microbiological systems. In particular, the social amoeba \textit{Disctyostelium discoideum} is widely used as a model organism, but it is not still clear how it behaves in heterogeneous environments. A few models focusing on mechanical features have already addressed the question; however, we suggest that phenomenological models focusing on the population dynamics may provide new meaningful data. Consequently, by means of a specific Multi-agent system model, we study the dynamical features emerging from complex social interactions among individuals belonging to amoeba colonies.\\ After defining an appropriate metric to quantitatively estimate the gathering process, we find that: a) obstacles play the role of local topological perturbation, as they alter the flux of chemical signals; b) physical obstacles (blocking the cellular motion and the chemical flux) and purely chemical obstacles (only interfering with chemical flux) elicit similar dynamical behaviors; c) a minimal program for robustly gathering simulated cells does not involve mechanisms for obstacle sensing and avoidance; d) fluctuations of the dynamics concur in preventing multiple stable clusters. Comparing those findings with previous results, we speculate about the fact that chemotactic cells can avoid obstacles by simply following the altered chemical gradient. Social interactions are sufficient to guarantee the aggregation of the whole colony past numerous obstacles

Model of human collective decision-making in complex environments

A continuous-time Markov process is proposed to analyze how a group of humans solves a complex task, consisting in the search of the optimal set of decisions on a fitness landscape. Individuals change their opinions driven by two different forces: (i) the self-interest, which pushes them to increase their own fitness values, and (ii) the social interactions, which push individuals to reduce the diversity of their opinions in order to reach consensus. Results show that the performance of the group is strongly affected by the strength of social interactions and by the level of knowledge of the individuals. Increasing the strength of social interactions improves the performance of the team. However, too strong social interactions slow down the search of the optimal solution and worsen the performance of the group. In particular, we find that the threshold value of the social interaction strength, which leads to the emergence of a superior intelligence of the group, is just the critical threshold at which the consensus among the members sets in. We also prove that a moderate level of knowledge is already enough to guarantee high performance of the group in making decisions.Comment: 12 pages, 8 figues in European Physical Journal B, 201