The Computer Revolution/Artificial Intelligence/Weak VS Strong AI
From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection
[edit] Weak Artificial Intelligence
Weak AI gives computers elements of human cognition. The ability to think like a human. A good example of Weak AI is computer software which uses a process known as "brute force" to calculate probabilities. The case of chess master Garry Kasparov vs IBM's Deep Blue program is a good illustration. Although Kasparov had the advantage of human intuition, Deep Blue had the ability to calculate 200 million probabilities per second. In the end Kasparov was overcome by Deep Blues super efficient ability to calculate those probabilities. Another example of Weak AI is the spell checking software, which like Deep Blue uses probabilities make determinations. When a writer has spelled a word incorrectly the software program does not check the spelling like a grade school teacher does. But compares the incorrectly spelled word against a dictionary of correctly spelled terms with similar characters. It then chooses the word most probably intended. The efficiency of Weak AI is determined by the speed at which such comparisons can be made and the depth of the database which it draws on.
[edit] Strong Artificial Intelligence
Strong AI claims that a computer can be given the ability to think on a level with humans and possibly become "aware" of itself at some point. Strong AI is still in its infancy and has yet to develop to a level of credibility among scholars. At Stanford University professor Douglas Lenat and a team of programmers,linguists,theologians, mathematicians, and philosophers have recorded 1.4 million basic truths and generalities onto a data base in an attempt to give a computer the intelligence of a 12 year old. They have also given the computer the ability to ask questions and form assumptions. Strong AI uses two approaches. Cyc which loads the database with facts and rules and Cog which searches for patterns.
[edit] Conclusion
The efforts of Douglas Lent and other teams of scholars who have attempted to impart a database with the distinctly human quality of intuition are admirable. However, the author does not see how this approach differs from Weak AI. Although the type of information differs
both methods require the building of data bases and at the core use probabilities or high speed comparisons to draw conclusions. Computers though capable of performing tasks far beyond the ability of humans are not (at this point) able to mimic the act of human intuition, because intuition is a unique and individual possession of every different person. It cannot be created or quantified by facts, figures, basic truths or generalities. It is not downloadable regardless of the size of the data base.
