gcj@qmc-ori.UUCP (Gordon Joly) (07/14/86)
The test used in the film is to look for an emotional response to the questions. They are fired off in quick succession, without giving the candidate time to think. He might then get angry... > By the way, the fastest way to identify human > intelligence may be to look for questions that a human will recognize > as nonsense or outside his expected sphere of knowledge ("How long > would you broil a 1-pound docket?" "Is the Des Moines courthouse taller > or shorter than the Wichita city hall?") but that an imitator might try > to bluff through. -- KIL ``Bluff''? What's the payoff? Gordon Joly INET: gcj%maths.qmc.ac.uk%cs.qmc.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk EARN: gcj%UK.AC.QMC.MATHS%UK.AC.QMC.CS@AC.UK UUCP: ...!seismo!ukc!qmc-ori!gcj
gcj@qmc-ori.UUCP (Gordon Joly) (07/15/86)
Interesting point about the imitator not being able to discover what is a valid question and what is a piece of nonsense. Reminds me of the theory of automatic integration in computer algebra. The analogy is a bit thin, but basically the algebra system decides first whether or not it has the power (ie there exists an algorithm) before trying to proceed with the integration. If fact, the machine never integrates; it just differentiates in a clever way to get near to the answer. It then alters the result to get the correct answer, and uses the inverse nature of differentiation and integration. I said it was a bit thin; the integrator is working backwards from the answer to find the correct question:-) Gordon Joly INET: gcj%maths.qmc.ac.uk%cs.qmc.ac.uk@cs.ucl.ac.uk EARN: gcj%UK.AC.QMC.MATHS%UK.AC.QMC.CS@AC.UK UUCP: ...!seismo!ukc!qmc-ori!gcj