[comp.sys.intel] AI Potentials

BINDNER@auvm.auvm.edu (10/05/90)

A few thoughts on the limits and potentials of AI.

First the limits.  I don't think AI will ever be able to really duplicate
human judgement.  It may one day be the compliment of man's rational
thought, but it will never duplicate man as it will not evolve the same way.
Thus, the thinking machine will never happen and the expert system is limited
to an automated rulebook with data processing functions.  Emotion, intuition,
inspiration (gasp, a dualist) and other things which are physical or spiritual
are outside the scope of our abilities (at least I hope they are).

Next, the potentials.  Although AI will never duplicate thought it may
enhance it.  It will do this by aiding human's in their use of computers.
Managers and scientists have the ability to think, and in fact they do it
well.  What they can't do is digest the enormous amounts of data which
automation makes gatherable.  Expert systems and their successors can aid
this analysis.  However, hunches and judgement are beyond the capablities of
automation (at least for the present) as they are non-rational.

A further potential, possibly AIs grandest is to make computers accessable
to all.  Let me elaborate.  Nothing discourages a new user more than the
literal nature of computers.   As all hackers know, computers like exact
commands (and will accept nothing less).  Correct this problem and AI
will have served its function nicely.  An attempt has been made to work
around it with the rise of the menu driven system.  However, this is not
a true solution (though it has the same effect).  Here's what I would like
in an AI system:

   - user affection (as opposed to user friendliness).  I expect my
     PC to cuss at me if I cuss at it and compliment me if I compliment
     it.  It should know the answer I want based on context.

   - mistake correction.  If I type Logim and it needs Logon it should
     ask me "Do you mean Logon?" and if I respond Yes (or Y or sure
     depending upon how well it knows me) after a number of repeated
     trial (2 to 5 depending upon how similar the command or error is
     to other commands) it will automatically say "I assume you meant
     Logon" and implement the command without asking me.

     Instead of saying command not understood it would search for
     permutations of the command from the front or back.  These might
     be based on context (for instance, if machine is not logged on
     it would query for logon command if expected, and if not found
     query for synonyms.  Model high level pseudo code:

       If command = error search permutations
       If search positive go to presenter
       if search negative search synonymes
       If search positive go to presenter
       Present commandwith question "do you mean ()
       If answer=y or synonym or synonym or close permutation execute
            and add the command or misprint to synonym structure
       If answer=n ""   ""    ""    ""   "   ""      ""         ""
            ask "what do you mean?" (in case of typos and not ignorance)
            and requery.  If after 2 tries nothing comes up ask
            "do you wish to try something else?"  if n etc. offer a help
            screen or menu, if y restart.
        Loops should also be included for vulgarity, etc.

   - voice recognition, response, OCR and handwriting deciphering (of
     course).  I suggest a closed loop between VR and speaking with
     the system attempting to answer me in my own voice.  When the
     comparitor figures a close enough match (or my ear does) it should
     be able to decipher most words.  A training vocab could be developed
     (possibly a personalized version which could be recorded once and
     plugged into any similar machine).

   - VR will make language content access easier.  This is because
     language interaction could occur all the time.  The mistake
     correction/language acquisition feature would obviously be
     incorporated into the DOS and Root systems.  A dual processor
     would also be helpful.  If it determines a job takes over 2
     minutes to run the job will be sent to a batch "subconcious"
     while the talk system chats with the operator using every
     opportunity to build associations between concepts, i.e. if
     a new word is found it will try to put it into its synonym
     structure.  This structure would contain such things as
     emotional loading (polite to vulgar scales and sterile to
     emotive scales) tense, gender, etc.  This time might be
     used to clean up synonym ambiguities or be hooked into
     a news net which gives briefs on current events or
     discusses them (events tailored to operator from sport to
     politics to sex).  Time would also be used to identify which
     subjects are important to the operator.

  -  If keyboards are eliminated an input/edit toggle would be
     necessary, as would a larger screen with standard keys
     listed in a sidebar.

  -  Patterns of use could be recorded for possible duplication.
     The macro storage facility does this.  However, it is not
     sensative to environmental variation.  For instance, if a common
     set of commands (macro) is used in cell a5, but a different
     spreadsheet is similar, but has an extra collumn a2 the macro
     would start at a6.

  -  Systems would have diagnostics (temperature, memory) built
     into them to complain in quite human terms (anthropromorphism
     strikes again) if a problem occurs or could occur.

   - The guiding principle here is to make the computer seem human,
     though the thought processes are far from human (though maybe
     not too far).  The key is to take fear out of computing.

There are drawbacks to this approach.  A new DOS, memory structure,
and hardware would be needed.  However, advances in memory are made
every day, so this might be feasible soon (comments on doability?).

I hope some of these ideas are useful.  I've been kicking them
around for a few years now.  Have any been tried? Am I too late and
just ill informed on the state of the art?  Discussion please.  If
by some chance I have hit on something feel free to use it, but I
want a working a copy (or 6).

I'll interface (internet?) with you all later,

Mike Bindner