This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It should be noted that AI systems are not algorithms with known results, they are heuristics that approximate the solution. AI is used when complete analysis can be done are rare. AI is used when the input space is large and the decisions hard to make. The neural network or other methods approximate the solution but that solution is approximate as it does not cover all use cases. AI should be treated as a heuristic that gets one closer to the solution but not all the way there. It should not be used to drive cars, in hiring or in healthcare. Those fields are too critical for approximations.
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Natural stupidity and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 27#Natural stupidity until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 20:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Over at Fuzzy logic#Artificial intelligence, it (currently) says:
Maybe somebody here can improve that section of Fuzzy logic. -- R. S. Shaw ( talk) 04:21, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
This is a very long article that I really like. Thanks to whoever created this article about AI. Note: There is only AI that controls self-driving-cars like a Tesla. I wonder when AI will control everything. Antiesten ( talk) 23:42, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
This summer and fall, I have copy-edited the entire article for brevity (as well as better organization, citation format, and a non-technical WP:AUDIENCE). The article is down from its peak of 34 text pages down to about 21 or so. Most of this savings was from copy-editing for tighter prose and better organization, but there was a good deal of stuff that was cut. I tried to move as much material as I could down sub-articles like existential risk of AI or machine learning and so on. I've documented exactly where everything I cut has been moved to, and indicated the things I couldn't find a place for (or were otherwise unusable). You can see exactly where this material went here: Talk:Artificial intelligence/Where did it go? 2021. ---- CharlesGillingham ( talk) 00:52, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Artificial intelligence has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
hey i found some extra information i would like to add 12.96.155.31 ( talk) 16:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Not sure if this will gain any traction or get wider spread attention. I believe this Washington Post article and this Economist article are the first mainstream discussions of it. Not saying I personally give it any credibility but it is interesting. If this shows up in any more publications might it be fit for inclusion, or is this just WP:RECENTISM trivia? —DIYeditor ( talk) 21:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
This got more coverage on the 12th. I guess this would also be relevant to Turing test if it proves enduring. —DIYeditor ( talk) 03:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Added a comma to sentence:
' Philosopher Nick Bostrom argues that sufficiently intelligent AI if it chooses actions based on achieving some goal, will exhibit convergent behavior such as acquiring resources or protecting itself from being shut down.'
between "AI" and "if" to improve flow and grammar. Please correct if mistaken, thank you! King keudo ( talk) 20:51, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
This article has again been rewritten by someone to once again narrowly define AI as: only autonomous agents are AI. This is based on the Russell definition, which is highly controversial, if not almost generally rejected. This article has been repeatedly been sabotaged by ABM, robotics, killer drones, etc. advocates to narrowly define AI as interactive agents, thereby excluding some of the major key fields of actual AI such as computer vision, speech recognition/transcription, machine translation.
The trick being used to misdefine seem to confuse between AI and AI-systems/AI-based systems/etc.: the former synthesized information, the latter includes an AI component, but also wrongly includes purely procedural steps that have no intelligence to them. A typical misdefinition seems to go like:
AI is difficult to define, AI-based system are things interact with their environment
Google gives this:
the theory and development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages.
The explanation of their use of Oxford for all definitions is given here: https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/10106608?hl=en
This article needs a definition that recognizes these major fields like CV and speech recognition as being AI (i.e. not being a part of AI). The productive way is probably to early on state that AI is often encountered in everyday life as part of larger AI-based systems, which can also include procedural components. Bquast ( talk) 18:19, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
The user below has a request that an edit be made to
Artificial intelligence/Archive 13. That user has an
actual or apparent
conflict of interest. The requested edits backlog is moderate. Please be patient. There are currently 140 requests waiting for review. Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Wikipedia guidelines and policies. |
Being a scientific researcher, I am new to editing Wikipedia. Can you help me, please? I propose to add a unified framework for "Artificial Intelligence in Enterprise Applications". The framework has recently been published in a peer-reviewed, high-quality scientific journal (Scimago Q1), refer to https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0923474822000467. I am the author of that article and declare a conflict of interest as I am related to the AI article on Wikipedia as a researcher. Specifically, I wanted to contribute my framework's visualization/figure (refer to Figure 6 at the end of the journal article) and an explanatory paragraph for the following reasons: 1) To add further clarity to the current Wikipedia article by depicting the interrelationships of various AI subfields in a visualization/graphic form, and 2) in the proposed explanatory paragraph include cross-links for these subfields to their corresponding areas on Wikipedia. The framework does not contradict anything in the existing Wikipedia article. I published my research article as Open Access and have approval from the publisher to contribute my framework to Wikipedia. Kind regards, Heinzhausw ( talk) 06:13, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
References
Under Tools, the first line contains a misplaced modifier. "Many problems in AI can be solved theoretically by intelligently searching through many possible solutions..." The line should probably read: "AI can solve many problems theoretically by intelligently searching through many possible solutions..." LBirdy ( talk) 16:02, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
there has for a long time been an inline comment to remove some sections, there are too many in this article.
I suggest to remove the talk about intelligent agents, it is highly confusing (not in the least because this article was not very accurate with this before), and it does not belong here, there already is an article on intelligent agent. Bquast ( talk) 01:41, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
@Bquast: I'm fine with reframing the definition without the term "intelligent agents". This term's popularity peaked back around 2000 or so. A good reworking might even make the underlying philosophical points more clear.
I would be fine with McCarthy's definition, i.e. "Intelligence is the computational part of the ability to achieve goals in the world." (You mentioned above that you would be okay with the definition of AI proposed at The Dartmouth Conference, but I don't believe they made a formal definition -- I assume you had in mind McCarthy's understanding of the term.)
There are several essential elements to the academic definition of AI (as opposed to definitions from popular sources, or dictionaries):
R & N's chapter 2 definition uses a four way categorization: "Thinking humanly", 'acting humanly", "Thinking rationally", "Acting rationally". This is a good way to frame these issues. Two orthogonal dimensions thinking vs. acting, human-like vs goal-directed. ---- CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 06:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Oh, and one last thing, which often needs to be said on this page:
There are many, many contradictory sources on AI, whole communities of thinkers who have their own understanding of AI, and many thousands of individual writers who have tried their hand at defining it or re-defining it. The article relies heavily on Russell & Norvig's textbook, in many places, because it is by far the most popular textbook, used in literally thousands of introductory AI courses for almost thirty years now. From Wikipedia's point of view, R & N is the most reliable source we could cite on the topic.
And a parenthetical comment:
By the way, R & N defines "agent" as: "something that perceives and acts", i.e. "something with inputs and outputs". Autonomy or persistence is not a part of their discussion. Any program, any program at all, fits their definition of an "agent". ---- CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 06:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Artificial intelligence has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I'm requesting to add a section under "risks" of artificial intelligence
Gender Bias in Artificial Intelligence: As artificial intelligence continues to evolve and learn, it’s important to address the fact that the field of AI is extremely male dominated and how that impacts the way AI is learning language and values. In an article written by Susan Leavy from University College Dublin, she talks about the existence of the language used when referencing male and female roles. For example: the term “man-kind” and “man” referring to all of humanity, work roles such as firefighters being seen as a male role, and the words used to describe family such as how a father would be seen as a “family man” and that women don’t have an equal term. If these societal norms aren’t challenged throughout the advancement of AI, then the small ways that language differs between genders will be embedded into the AI’s memory and further reinforce gender inequality for future generations.
Leavy, Susan. “Gender Bias in Artificial Intelligence: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Gender Equality in Software Engineering.” ACM Digital Library, 28 May 2018, https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3195570.3195580. Kawahsaki ( talk) 19:57, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
it is important to address the fact. Wikipedia may state that a source believes something is important, but Wikipedia would not say something like this in it's own voice.
The article currently quotes the Oxford dictionary to define AI: "the theory and development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and translation between languages."
This definition is rejected by the leading AI textbook (see Chpt. 2, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach) and by AI founder John McCarthy (who coined the term "artificial intelligence") (see multiple citations in the article; just search for his name)
A brief introduction to the problems with definition:
The problem is this phrase: "tasks that normally require human intelligence". Consider these two lists:
Tasks that require considerable human intelligence:
Tasks that do not require human intelligence (i.e. "unintelligent" small children or animals can do it):
The Oxford definition categorizes programs that can do tasks from list 1 as AI, and categorize programs from list 2 as being outside of AI's scope. This is obviously not what is actually happening out in the field -- exactly the opposite, in most cases. All of the problems in list 1 were solved back in the 1960s, with computers far less powerful than the one in your microwave or clock radio. The problems in list 2 have only been solved recently, if at all.
Activities considered "intelligent" when a human does them can sometimes be relatively easy for machines, and sometimes activities that would never appear particularly "intelligent" when a human does them can be incredibly difficult for machines. (See Moravec's paradox) Thus the definition of artificial intelligence can't just be in terms of "human intelligence" -- a more general definition is needed. The Oxford dictionary definition is not adequate.
My recommendation
Scrap the extended definition all together: just stick with the naive common usage definition. Go directly to the examples (i.e. paragraph two of the lede)
Leave the difficult problem of defining "intelligence" (without reference to human intelligence) to the section "Defining AI" deeper in the article. This section considers the major issues, and should settle on "rationality" (i.e. goal-directed behavior) as Russell and Norvig do, and as John McCarthy did.---- CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 04:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
A major cleanup is needed of all these sections. It seems like many authors have inserted their won (maybe) relevant material here. It should contain references of the text used. It should also avoid mentioning the same references in many different places, in particular the confusing Russell and Norvig book. Bquast ( talk) 14:32, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:24, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2023 and 5 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Liliability ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Liliability ( talk) 03:41, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
In the "Future - Technological unemployment" section, would it be appropriate to add a clarifying statement to the quote, "...but they generally agree that it could be a net benefit if productivity gains are redistributed." With how it's presented, there is explicit reasoning that productivity gains would be seen by displaced workers receiving the monetary excess generated by AI's labor. However, this source is a survey of economics professors. Not business leaders speaking on affected industries and not sociologists speaking on affected workers. As a professional writer, presenting a quote like that from experts in a different field feels like an intentional misrepresentation.
Newer and older articles take a different tack, speculating that productivity gains would be seen in industries receiving displaced workers. Elsewhere, it's predicted that productivity gains would be seen from knowledge workers that learn or are able to augment their work with AI as it presents the opportunity to handle repetitive tasks.
Anecdotally, I use AI as an editor and it has tripled my productivity as a writer, which has given me time to edit Wikipedia articles. Software developers with whom I work have announced similar results, without mention of Wikipedia. In that regard, the section on technological unemployment speaks more to the AI boogeyman than it does potential benefit, and I think we should fix that.
NOTE: I am not an AI nor am I employed by an AI or an AI developer. I have no stake in AI and no more interest than ensuring an accurate reporting of the facts. Oleanderyogurt ( talk) 00:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
This article needs an infobox, it could be there general infobox template, or a specific one. Technology standard is a common one, but standard is not correct. Maybe scientific domain or something. What does everyone think? Bquast ( talk) 16:24, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
I believe machine learning is part of AI and the "Tools" section should contain a subsection named "machine learning methods".
However, currently under the "Tools" section, there is only a subsection named "Classifiers and statistical learning methods". "Classification" is just one task of supervised learning, which is one type of machine learning. Also, not all machine learning methods are statistical.
Changing "classifiers and statistical learning methods" to "machine learning methods" can also make the title simpler and easier to understand.
@ CharlesGillingham @ CharlesTGillingham
Cooper2222 ( talk) 21:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
I cut this, because it is at the wrong level of detail for the lede (which should primarily be a summary of the contents of the article). Not sure where to move it to, so I put it here for now ---- CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 17:42, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
References
CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 17:42, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
I cut this from AI § history, for several reasons:
It's going to take me some research on how Wikipedia should address the terminological issue of "symbolic AI" vs. "GOFAI" (don't worry about it if you don't know what that is). To keep moving forward, I will just park this stuff here.
The second vision, known as the connectionist approach, sought to achieve intelligence through learning. Proponents of this approach, most prominently Frank Rosenblatt, sought to connect Perceptron in ways inspired by connections of neurons. [1] James Manyika and others have compared the two approaches to the mind (Symbolic AI) and the brain (connectionist). Manyika argues that symbolic approaches dominated the push for artificial intelligence in this period, due in part to its connection to intellectual traditions of Descartes, Boole, Gottlob Frege, Bertrand Russell, and others. Connectionist approaches based on cybernetics or artificial neural networks were pushed to the background but have gained new prominence in recent decades. [2]
References
CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 18:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
@ DancingPhilosopher: maybe it is just me, but I can barely understand the new intro. I think the old version was clearer and more accessible. Could you please try to make it more accessible? Vpab15 ( talk) 14:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
References
I agree, the version in the box goes off into the weeds in so many directions that it does not communicate the essentials. Thanks for the effort though. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 19:51, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@ DancingPhilosopher: I'm moving this contribution to progress in AI, which is the article on this topic
{{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
--- CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 21:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC) CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 21:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
The current short description is:
Intelligence demonstrated by machines
This is:
Regarding #2, I can "do" AI, e.g. a FF neural network on paper, that is a much AI en silica.
I propose to use (in line with the main body text):
The ability of systems to perceive, synthesize, and infer information
Bquast ( talk) Bquast ( talk) 15:41, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I am certain that this section doesn't belong here. It's WP:undue weight for a summary article like this with so much to cover. It's very solidly written, accurate and well-sourced, and ideally I would like to find a place for it somewhere else in Wikipedia, but I'm stumped as to where to move it. Does anyone have any ideas? Maybe this should be a short article of its own? Or part of a new stub about ... what? ---- CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 05:26, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
In 2019, WIPO reported that AI was the most prolific emerging technology in terms of the number of patent applications and granted patents, the Internet of things was estimated to be the largest in terms of market size. It was followed, again in market size, by big data technologies, robotics, AI, 3D printing and the fifth generation of mobile services (5G). [1] Since AI emerged in the 1950s, 340,000 AI-related patent applications were filed by innovators and 1.6 million scientific papers have been published by researchers, with the majority of all AI-related patent filings published since 2013. Companies represent 26 out of the top 30 AI patent applicants, with universities or public research organizations accounting for the remaining four. [2] The ratio of scientific papers to inventions has significantly decreased from 8:1 in 2010 to 3:1 in 2016, which is attributed to be indicative of a shift from theoretical research to the use of AI technologies in commercial products and services. Machine learning is the dominant AI technique disclosed in patents and is included in more than one-third of all identified inventions (134,777 machine learning patents filed for a total of 167,038 AI patents filed in 2016), with computer vision being the most popular functional application. AI-related patents not only disclose AI techniques and applications, they often also refer to an application field or industry. Twenty application fields were identified in 2016 and included, in order of magnitude: telecommunications (15 percent), transportation (15 percent), life and medical sciences (12 percent), and personal devices, computing and human–computer interaction (11 percent). Other sectors included banking, entertainment, security, industry and manufacturing, agriculture, and networks (including social networks, smart cities and the Internet of things). IBM has the largest portfolio of AI patents with 8,290 patent applications, followed by Microsoft with 5,930 patent applications. [2]
CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 05:26, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 May 2023 and 10 August 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): NoemieCY, ZhegeID ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by ZhegeID ( talk) 06:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
I've finished updating the article to be in line with Russell and Norvig 2021 edition. ---- CharlesTGillingham ( talk) 00:18, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2023 and 30 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cbetters23 ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by RuthBenander ( talk) 14:22, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Currently all the development of AI is concentrated in advancing current algorithms and mathematical models. Several Computer Science departments around the world are pushing this field by researching novel architecture and more complex computational algorithms. It should be clear that AI fulls under computer science, as AI primary goal is to conceive computers/machines the ability to infer information upon unseen data. JoaoL975 ( talk) 18:14, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Other definitions avoid attributing the quality of intelligence to the computational capacity of machines or software. Jo Adetunji, Editor, The Conversation UK, wrote that the concept of artificial intelligence is being used abusively or, in other words, there is an inflation of the term that harms its realization. ( [1])
This is how other definitions arise, such as that of the expert technologist Mauro D. Ríos, who defines AI as the field of information science dedicated to giving software automation, characteristics that simulate the cognitive abilities of the human being, applying these simulations to problem solving and manifesting the results as moving actions, written or spoken language, graphic representations or emerging data.
Ríos, Mauro,Arficial intelligence: When technology is the smallest of the paradigms. (July 26, 2023). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4521736 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4521736 2800:A4:1782:D300:9488:FEE5:2849:DCDF ( talk) 01:18, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 9 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AdvaitPanicker, Ferna235, Boris Zeng ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Mbraile ( talk) 20:12, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 6 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Asude Guvener, Ligh1ning ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Ligh1ning ( talk) 22:23, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
I think that the disruptive editing by uninformed users unfortunately has reached a level where we have to protect this page, like the Talk:ChatGPT#Semi-protection of this talk page page. Or is there a better way? Sjö ( talk) 13:59, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
U.S. President Biden has signed an executive order (admittedly technically not a law or legislation) on AI: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-ai-artificial-intelligence-executive-order/ Kdammers ( talk) 21:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2023 and 14 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wobuaichifan ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Wobuaichifan ( talk) 02:03, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2023 and 19 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yaman Shqeirat ( article contribs). Peer reviewers: Cvaquera59.
— Assignment last updated by UndercoverSwitch ( talk) 03:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
How is it possible that a page explaining Artificial Intelligence (computer intelligence) has not one mention about computer science? JoaoL975 ( talk) 18:11, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
I believe certain parts of the AI Applications section should either be moved (like the section on Chinese facial recognition to the "Bad actors and weaponized AI" subcategory under Ethics) or shortened (like the section on astronomy).
In addition, I think the section is long enough that subheadings should be introduced to make it easier to read through. AdvaitPanicker ( talk) 01:03, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 11 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Asude Guvener, Ligh1ning ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Fedfed2 ( talk) 00:53, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AdvaitPanicker, Ferna235, Boris Zeng ( article contribs). Peer reviewers: Anieukir, Carariney.
— Assignment last updated by Thecanyon ( talk) 05:32, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
It would probably be a bit more accurate if the section "Tools" was named "Techniques" instead. Wiktionary's definition of tool ("A piece of software used to develop software or hardware, or to perform low-level operations") doesn't exactly match what this section is about. Alenoach ( talk) 03:43, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
I propose replacing the current animation in the subsection "local search" with this one, which is easier to understand. Alenoach ( talk) 16:33, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Age of AI has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 8 § Age of AI until a consensus is reached. Duckmather ( talk) 23:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
The redirect Ai tool has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 9 § Ai tool until a consensus is reached. Duckmather ( talk) 06:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)