4 ms·

I think there are potential concrete definitions, but people disagree on which (if any) are correct

• mdp2021 5y ago
  > but people disagree Oh, but there is no need for such """correctness""". The way is also well defined negatively - the lacks express their presence clearly -, and this page provides already a few examples: -- "A is taller than B, B plays basketball, who is taller?" If the system does not reply "A", then it does not understand the question; by a general consideration, it may be evident that it was designed to "guess" instead of "know", and there lies very patently the structural fault. -- "A just left the house and is now in the market, where is A?" If the system does not understand "states", etc. If it cannot build a world representation, etc. -- "A fell from the flying helicopter, how is A?" If the system does not understand "falling from an height", etc. If it cannot "tell itself a story" (Prof. Patrick Winston), etc. The latter tells you about the logical relations between those "definitions" (of conjunction, so that (¬Av¬B)→¬C ). Prof. Winston defines "intelligence" as "the ability to tell oneself stories, which will also reveal outcomes of experiences you have not concretely lived". The definition may leave gaps when taken alone (especially if by somebody who confuses indications and definitions), but the lack of what is intended with such idea has full impact (no """inner storytelling""" - actually, I would say, no "productive engine" -, no "intelligence").