Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
FAQs
Al and the Study of Mind
References
All Topics
Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence: Cognition as Computation

Profile image of Avron BarrAvron Barr

1982

Abstract

: The ability and compulsion to know are as characteristic of our human nature as are our physical posture and our languages. Knowledge and intelligence, as scientific concepts, are used to describe how an organism's experience appears to mediate its behavior. This report discusses the relation between artificial intelligence (AI) research in computer science and the approaches of other disciplines that study the nature of intelligence, cognition, and mind. The state of AI after 25 years of work in the field is reviewed, as are the views of its practitioners about its relation to cognate disciplines. The report concludes with a discussion of some possible effects on our scientific work of emerging commercial applications of AI technology, that is, machines that can know and can take part in human cognitive activities.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What are the central limitations in current AI cognitive abilities?add

The paper reveals that AI struggles with reasoning about others' beliefs and making inferences, highlighting gaps in human-like cognitive behaviors that remain unresolved as of 2023.

How does AI relate to developments in cognitive psychology?add

Research indicates that AI’s emergence has redefined cognitive psychology, prompting theoretical advancements through computational metaphors, as both fields explore similar cognitive behaviors.

What historical factors contributed to the emergence of AI as a discipline?add

Key influences include early work in mathematical logic and computation during the 1930s and 1940s, notably by Turing and Church, shaping AI's foundational principles.

How do expert systems demonstrate the application of AI in real-world contexts?add

The MYCIN system exemplifies AI's capacity to achieve near-expert performance by enabling machines to interact and learn from human users, highlighting the potential for practical applications.

What misconceptions about language processing have impacted AI advancements?add

The paper discusses early assumptions that language understanding was purely syntactic, revealing that successful processing requires extensive world knowledge, complicating machine translation and comprehension efforts.

Related papers

The AI Brain, Mind, and Consciousness: Unveiling the Enigma of Artificial Cognition
Soumendra Nath Thakur

While the human-centered version explored the interplay of the biological brain, subjective mind, and the phenomenon of consciousness, the present work transposes the framework to the emerging domain of Artificial Intelligence. By adopting the same structural lens, this paper aims to clarify how the concepts of "brain," "mind," and "consciousness" can be understood in the AI context-not as biological realities but as computational, representational, and emergent properties. The intention is to emphasize continuity between the two works: the first grounds the enigma in the human condition, while the second extends the reflection into the artificial domain. Together, the pair of papers seeks to provide a comparative platform for discussing cognition, intelligence, and awareness across natural and artificial systems.

View PDFchevron_right
Artificial Psychology: The Psychology of AI Artificial Psychology: The Psychology of AI
jonadri bundo

Having artificially intelligent machines that think, learn, reason, experience, and can function autonomously, without supervision, is one of the most intriguing goals in all of Computer Science. As the types of problems we would like machines to solve get more complex, it is becoming a necessary goal as well. One of the many problems associated with this goal is that what learning and reasoning are have so many possible meanings that the solution can easily get lost in the sea of opinions and options. The goal of this paper is to establish some foundational principles, theory, and concepts that we feel are the backbone of real, autonomous Artificial Intelligence. With this fully autonomous, learning, reasoning, artificially intelligent system (an artificial brain), comes the need to possess constructs in its hardware and software that mimic processes and subsystems that exist within the human brain, including intuitive and emotional memory concepts. Presented here is a discussion of the psychological constructs of artificial intelligence and how they might play out in an artificial mind.

View PDFchevron_right
AI Reloaded: Objectives, Potentials, and Challenges of the Novel Field of Brain-Like Artificial Intelligence
Rosemarie Velik

The general objective of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is to make machinesparticularly computersdo things that require intelligence when done by humans. In the last 60 years, AI has significantly progressed and today forms an important part of industry and technology. However, despite the many successes, fundamental questions concerning the creation of human-level intelligence in machines still remain open and will probably not be answerable when continuing on the current, mainly mathematic-algorithmically-guided path of AI. With the novel discipline of Brain-Like Artificial Intelligence, one potential way out of this dilemma has been suggested. Brain-Like AI aims at analyzing and deciphering the working mechanisms of the brain and translating this knowledge into implementable AI architectures with the objective to develop in this way more efficient, flexible, and capable technical systems This article aims at giving a review about this young and still heterogeneous and dynamic research field.

View PDFchevron_right
Artificial Psychology: The Psychology of AI
James Crowder, JSCI Systemics, Cybernetics, and Informatics

Having artificially intelligent machines that think, learn, reason, experience, and can function autonomously, without supervision, is one of the most intriguing goals in all of Computer Science. As the types of problems we would like machines to solve get more complex, it is becoming a necessary goal as well. One of the many problems associated with this goal is that what learning and reasoning are have so many possible meanings that the solution can easily get lost in the sea of opinions and options. The goal of this paper is to establish some foundational principles, theory, and concepts that we feel are the backbone of real, autonomous Artificial Intelligence. With this fully autonomous, learning, reasoning, artificially intelligent system (an artificial brain), comes the need to possess constructs in its hardware and software that mimic processes and subsystems that exist within the human brain, including intuitive and emotional memory concepts. Presented here is a discussion o...

View PDFchevron_right
Approaching Singularity: An Exploration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) via Machine Learning and Its Applications on Cognition
Mert Inan
View PDFchevron_right
Chapter 1 Artificial Intelligence ( Ai )
Khadijah Bahrol

2019

5 1.0 CONCEPT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE "Artificial intelligence" is a synthetic term whichdue to its suggestive potentialhas caused many misunderstandings and false expectations. Its origin can be traced back to the year 1956. This year was important in many aspects. For example, the book "Automata Studies" came out, compiling now famous articles in the field of cybernetics (Shannon & McCarthy, 1956). Since the first appearance of the words "artificial intelligence", usually associated with John McCarthy's 1956 Dartmouth Summer Research Project, interest in the topic and research into the development of intelligent machines has seen several ups and downs. Artificial intelligence (AI) is an important technology that supports daily social life and economic activities. It contributes greatly to the sustainable growth of Japan's economy and solves various social problems (Lu, Li, Chen, Kim, Serikawa, 2018). Artificial intelligence refers to the ability of a computer or a computer-enabled robotic system to process information and produce outcomes in a manner similar to the thought process of humans in learning, decision making and solving problems (Intelligence, 2017). By extension, the goal of AI systems is to develop systems capable of tacking complex problems in ways similar to human logic and reasoning.

View PDFchevron_right
Artificial intelligence and the future
William Clocksin

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2003

We consider some of the ideas influencing current artificial-intelligence research and outline an alternative conceptual framework that gives priority to social relationships as a key component and constructor of intelligent behaviour. The framework starts from Weizenbaum's observation that intelligence manifests itself only relative to specific social and cultural contexts. This is in contrast to a prevailing view, which sees intelligence as an abstract capability of the individual mind based on a mechanism for rational thought. The new approach is not based on the conventional idea that the mind is a rational processor of symbolic information, nor does it require the idea that thought is a kind of abstract problem solving with a semantics that is independent of its embodiment. Instead, priority is given to affective and social responses that serve to engage the whole agent in the life of the communities in which it participates. Intelligence is seen not as the deployment of capabilities for problem solving, but as constructed by the continual, ever-changing and unfinished engagement with the social group within the environment. The construction of the identity of the intelligent agent involves the appropriation or 'taking up' of positions within the conversations and narratives in which it participates. Thus, the new approach argues that the intelligent agent is shaped by the meaning ascribed to experience, by its situation in the social matrix, and by practices of self and of relationship into which intelligent life is recruited. This has implications for the technology of the future, as, for example, classic artificial intelligence models such as goal-directed problem solving are seen as special cases of narrative practices instead of as ontological foundations.

View PDFchevron_right
The science of artificial intelligence and its critics
Harry Collins

Interdisciplinary Science Reviews

Not many people seem to understand what it is to mimic human intelligence successfully irrespectivethat is, irrespective of internal states such as intentions. Successful mimicking will involve embedding in human societies. AI practitioners have concerned themselves with reproducing something that can mimic an individual human brain, failing to notice that if such a brain is to mimic human intelligence it will also have to mimic the process of becoming socialised in human society because crucial features of human intelligence are located in human societies. One notable example of this is natural language, which is continually changing and enormously flexible in ways that cannot be predicted or controlled by individuals. The fluent natural language speaker draws on society's language in the same way that a thermometer draws on the liquid in which it is embedded. The temperature that registers on the thermometer is a property of the liquid, not the thermometer, changing when the liquid warms or cools. In the same way the language spoken by a fluent individual is a property of the society in which he or she is embedded, not a property of the individual; like the thermometer, it changes when the society changes. This means that a Turing Test, based purely on linguistic performance, can be an excellent test of human-like intelligence in a machine. The nature of natural language explains some of the recent stunning successes of deep learning and explains its failures. I also try to explain why the science of AI is so poor at presenting and testing its claims. It aims at convincing the outside world of its success rather than engaging in the kind of assiduous selfcriticism engaged in by the physical sciences.

View PDFchevron_right
Artificial Intelligence
Yasser El Miedany

Rheumatology Teaching, 2018

View PDFchevron_right
A Comparative Analysis of Expert Opinions on Artificial Intelligence: Evolution, Applications, and Its Future
suman madan

Advanced Journal of Graduate Research

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a field of computer science that primarily focuses on automating tasks that explicitly require human intelligence. The mechanics of AI technology majorly revolves around central affairs including knowledge representation, learning, problem-solving, reasoning, etc. Additionally, each discipline of AI focuses on a particular component to efficiently train the machines. Every branch of AI technology exploits knowledge in machines using diversified practices but with a clear idea of achieving the desired output. AI has evolved drastically over the past two decades and is considered the most in-demand technology at present times in varied fields including healthcare, education, forecasting, security, etc. This paper provides an extensive survey on artificial intelligence and related work going on in this field, how it differs from human intelligence, various subfields of AI and their importance, various issues related to AI and possible solutions along wit...

View PDFchevron_right

References (50)

  1. M. A. 1972. Themietaphwrical brain. New York: Wilcy-lntcrsciencc.
  2. Armer, P. 1963. Attiudes toward intelligent machines. In Fi. A. ecigenbaum and J. F~eldman (Eds.), Computers ani hou gi. New York: McG raw-[ fll, 389-405.
  3. Barr, A., Bennett. J. S., and Clanccy. W. J. 1979. Transfi'r of expertise: A ihemte for A/ research (Working Paper No. I IPP-79-1l1). Stanford University. Heuristic Programming Project.
  4. Barr, A., and Feigenbaum, F. A. (Eds.). 198 1. The handbook of artificial intelligence (Vol. 1). Los Altos, Calif.: Kaufmann.
  5. Becker. J. 1). 1975. Reflections on the formal description of behavior. In 1). G. Bobro~k and A. Collins (Fds.). Representation and understanding: Studies ini cognitive science. Nc~k York: Academic Press. 83-102.
  6. Bernstein, .1. 198 . Profiles: Marvin Minsky. Nett Yorker lDecermber 14, pp. 50-126.
  7. Cohen, P. R. 1982. Models of cognition: Overview. In P). R. Cohen and F. A. Fcigcnhauin (Fd'. ), T'he handbook of artificial inteligeiice (Vol. 3). l os Altos. Calif.: Kaulfmann, 1-10.
  8. D)avis, R. 1976. Applications of ineta-level knowIlede to the construction. maintenance, and use oif large knowledge bases (Tech. Rep. STIAN-CS-76-564). SLanford Unixersity, Computer Science D~epartment. (Reprinted in R. lDavis and 1). Icnat (Fds.). Knowledge-based systems in artificial intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1982, 229-490.)
  9. D~resher, 1B. F.. and Hornstein, N. 1976. On some supposed contributions of artificial intelligence to the scientific study of language. (ognihion 4(4):321-398. (Sec also their replies to Schank and Wilensky. Cognition 5:147-150, and to Winograd, Cognition 5:379-372.)
  10. Feigenbaum, E. A. 1977. 'I'le art of artificial intelligence, 1: 'I1hemes and case Studies of knowledge engincering. Proceedings of the Fiftlh International Joint C~onferences on Artificial Intelligence. 1014-1029.
  11. Feigenbaum, F. A.. and F-eldman, J. (Fds.). 1963. Computers and thought. Newk York: McGraw-Hill.
  12. Kornfeld, W. A., and Hewitt. C. 1981. The scientific commnunity metaphor (Tech. Rep. AIM-641). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Al L .aboratory.
  13. Lenat. D. G. 1981. The heuristics of nature (Working Paper No. IIPP-81-22). Stanford University. Hleuristic Programming Project.
  14. L~indsay. R., Buchanan. B. G., F~eigenbaum, F. A.. and I edcrberg. J. 1980. IJFNDRAL New York: McG raw-Ilill.
  15. Locbncr, E. E. 1976. Subhistories of the light emitting diode. IEE-.E Transactions on Electron Devices 23(7):675-699.
  16. Loebnier, F. E., and Borden, H. 1969. Ecological niches for optoclectronic devices. J$'FSCON. Vol. 13. Session 20. 18.
  17. Marr. 1). 1977. Artificial intelligence-A personal view. Artificial Intelligence 9(l):1-13.
  18. Maturana, It. 1976. Iliolog) of language: The epistemology of reality. In I's)chohgy and biology of language and thought. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
  19. McCorduck, P. 1979. Machines who think. San Francisco: Freeman.
  20. McCulloch, W. 1964. The postulational foundations of experimental epistemology. In l'imbodiments of mind. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 359-372.
  21. Miller, G. A., (alanter, F., and Pribram, K. H. 1960. Plans and the structure of behavior. New York: lolt, Rinehart and Winston.
  22. Miller, L. 1978. Has artificial intelligence contributed to an understanding of the human mind? A critique of arguments for and against. Cognitive Science 2(2): 111-128.
  23. Minsky, M. 1963. Steps toward artificial intelligence. In F. A. Ucigenbaum and J. Feldman (i-ds.). Computers andthought. New York: McGraw-H ill, 406-450.
  24. Minsky, M. (I'd.). 1968. Semantic information processing. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  25. Minsky, M., and Papert. S. 1969. Perceptrons." An introduction to computational geometry. Cambridge. Mass.: MIT Press.
  26. Neisser, U. 1976. Cognition and reality. San Francisco: Freeman.
  27. Newell, A. 1970. Remarks on the relationship between artificial intelligence and cognitive psychology. In R. Banerji and M. I). Mesarovic (FIds.), Theoretical approaches to non-numerical problem solving. New York: Springer-Verlag, 363-400.
  28. Newell, A. 1973a. Artificial intelligence and the concept of mind. In R. Schank and K. Colby (lds.). Computer models of thought and language. San Francisco: Freeman, 1-60.
  29. Newell, A. 1973b. You can't play 20 questions with nature and win. In W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing. New York: Academic Press, 283-308.
  30. Newell, A. 1980. Physical symbol systems. Cognitive Science 4(2): 135-183.
  31. Newell. A. 1981. The knowledge level. AI Magazine 2(2):1-20.
  32. Newell, A., and Simon. H. A. 1972. Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-[ fall.
  33. Newell, A.. and Simon, H. A. 1976. Computer science as empirical inquiry: Symbols and search (Turing Award Lecture, Association for Computing Machinery). Communications of the ACM 19(3):1 13-126.
  34. Nilsson, N. 1974. Artificial intelligence. In J. L. Rosenfeld (.d.), Proceedings (f the IH4P Congress (Vol. 4). New York: American Elsevier. 778-801.
  35. Nilsson, N. 1980. Principles of artificial intelligence. Palo Alto, Calif.: Tioga Press.
  36. Norman, ). A. 1980. Twelve issues for cognitive science. Cognitive Science 4(1):1-32.
  37. Papert, S. 1972. Paper given at the NUFFIC summer course on process models in psychology. The I1ague: NUFFIC.
  38. Riboud. J. 1979. Address to the meeting of shareholders, Schlumberger limited.
  39. Schank, R., and Abelson, R. 1977. Scripts, plans goals, and understanding. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
  40. Schank, R., and Wilensky, R. 1977. Response to Dresher and Hornstein. Cognition 5:133-146.
  41. Searle, J. R. 1980. Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3(3):411-457.
  42. Shortliffe, E. H. 1976. Comnputer-based medicalconsullations: MYCIN. New York: American Elsevier.
  43. Simon, H. A. 1969. The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, Mass.: M IT Press.
  44. Simon, H. A. 1980. Cognitive science: The newest science of the artificial. Cognitive Science 4(1):33-46.
  45. Smith, R. G. 1978. A framework for problem solving in a distributed processing environment (Tech. Rep. STAN-CS-78-7009). Stanford University, Department of Computer Science. (I)octoral dissertation.)
  46. Torda, C. 1982. Infonnation processing by the central nervous system and the computer (a comparison). Berkeley, Calif.: Walters.
  47. Turing, A. M. 1950. Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 59:433-460.
  48. von Neumann, J. 1958. The computer and the brain. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
  49. Winograd, T. 1977. On some contested suppositions of generative linguistics about the scientific study of language. Cognition 5:151-179.
  50. Winograd, T. 1979. Beyond programming languages. Communications of the ACM 22(7):391-401.

Related papers

Artificial intelligence: Cognition as computation (1982)
Avron Barr

1982

View PDFchevron_right
Human Cognition and Artificial Intelligence - A Plea for Science
scip AG, Marc Ruef

scip Labs, 2018

Cognition comprises mental process of the human brain. Artificial Intelligence tries to mimic these processes to solve complex problems and handle massive amounts of data. Serial vs. parallel and controlled vs. automated processes are the basis of cognitive sciences. Logic, probability theory and heuristics represent the pillars of theory formation for the human-machine comparison. Artificial neural networks (mimicking the human brain) are popular, because great advancements in specific fields were achieved. Systemic problem solving is still visionary, but a number of research projects are promising. Reciprocal, positive influences across disciplines might lead to rapid transformation. Polemics, as well idealism are out of place. Analysis must adhere to scientific and ethical standards with long-term orientation for the public good. After the physiological review, the next chapter will focus on consciousness (as a part of what gives life to physiology).

View PDFchevron_right
Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Systems
Lakshmi G

I became involved in AI during the 1970s, when I was in graduate school, because I wanted to understand the nature of the mind. This seemed as though it were one of the core questions of science, on an equal footing with questions about the nature of the universe and the nature of life. Artificial intelligence, with its computational metaphor, offered the only clear course for tackling this challenging problem, and the progress made in the field's first 20 years, since its founding at the 1956 Dartmouth meeting, seemed impressive enough to promise rapid strides toward a broad computational theory of mental phenomena.

View PDFchevron_right
Artificial Intelligence: What it Was, and What it Should Be?
Hala Hameed

International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications

Artificial Intelligence was embraced as an idea of simulating unique abilities of humans, such as thinking, selfimprovement, and expressing their feelings using different languages. The idea of "Programs with Common Sense" was the main and central goal of Classical AI; it was, mainly built around an internal, updatable cognitive model of the world. But, now almost all the proposed models and approaches lacked reasoning and cognitive models and have been transferred to be more data driven. In this paper, different approaches and techniques of AI are reviewed, specifying how these approaches strayed from the main goal of Classical AI, and emphasizing how to return to its main objective. Additionally, most of the terms and concepts used in this field such as Machine Learning, Neural Networks and Deep Learning are highlighted. Moreover, the relations among these terms are determined, trying to remove mysterious and ambiguities around them. The transition from the Classical AI to Neuro-Symbolic AI and the need for new Cognitive-based models are also explained and discussed.

View PDFchevron_right
Artificial Intelligence, Minds, and Brains
Jay ("Jason") Seitz

https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02495, 2025

In the last year or so (and going back many decades) there has been extensive claims by major computational scientists, engineers, and others that AGI (artificial general intelligence) is 5 or 10 years away, but without a scintilla of scientific evidence, for a broad body of these claims: Computers will become conscious, have a "theory of mind," think and reason, will become more intelligent than humans, and so on. But the claims are science fiction, not science. This article reviews evidence for the following three (3) propositions using an extensive body of scientific research and related sources from the cognitive and neurosciences; evolutionary evidence; linguistics; data science; comparative psychology; self-driving cars, and robotics; and the learning sciences. (1) Do computing machines (LLMs) think or reason? (2) Are computing machines (LLMs) sentient or conscious? (3) Do computing machines (LLMs) have a theory of mind?

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Information Theory
  • Mathematical Logic
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved