Creativity, the Turing test, and the (better) Lovelace test
Minds and Machines 11 (1):3-27 (2001)
| Abstract | The Turing Test (TT) is claimed by many to be a way to test for the presence, in computers, of such ``deep'' phenomena as thought and consciousness. Unfortunately, attempts to build computational systems able to pass TT (or at least restricted versions of this test) have devolved into shallow symbol manipulation designed to, by hook or by crook, trick. The human creators of such systems know all too well that they have merely tried to fool those people who interact with their systems into believing that these systems really have minds. And the problem is fundamental: the structure of the TT is such as to cultivate tricksters. A better test is one that insists on a certain restrictive epistemic relation between an artificial agent (or system) A, its output o, and the human architect H of A – a relation which, roughly speaking, obtains when H cannot account for how A produced o. We call this test the ``Lovelace Test'' in honor of Lady Lovelace, who believed that only when computers originate things should they be believed to have minds. | |||||||||
| Keywords | Computer Creativity Science Test Turing Test Byron, A Lady Lovelace | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,653 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesS. Watt (1996). Naive Psychology and the Inverted Turing Test. Psycoloquy 7 (14).
Jose Hernandez-Orallo (2000). Beyond the Turing Test. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9 (4):447-466.
Robert M. French (2000). Peeking Behind the Screen: The Unsuspected Power of the Standard Turing Test. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 12 (3):331-340.
Ayse P. Saygin, Ilyas Cicekli & Varol Akman (2000). Turing Test: 50 Years Later. Minds and Machines 10 (4):463-518.
A. P. Saygin & I. Cicekli (2000). Turing Test: 50 Years Later. Minds and Machines 10 (4):463-518.
Robert French (1996). The Inverted Turing Test: How a Mindless Program Could Pass It. Psycoloquy 7 (39).
James H. Moor (2001). The Status and Future of the Turing Test. Minds and Machines 11 (1):77-93.
Saul Traiger (2000). Making the Right Identification in the Turing Test. Minds and Machines 10 (4):561-572.
Gerald J. Erion (2001). The Cartesian Test for Automatism. Minds and Machines 11 (1):29-39.
B. Jack Copeland (2000). The Turing Test. Minds and Machines 10 (4):519-539.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads75 ( #10,829 of 548,984 )Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #10,270 of 548,984 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
