I feel as though the other three types of definition dull in comparison to this literal meaning. To some extent, research have been done and results have been concluded in each of the other three types. Thinking rationally, acting humanly, and acting rationally can all be done with interesting algorithms and bunch of conditional statements that programmers set beforehand as a guideline to how the AAA should respond. For instance, there Is a facial recognition program built into a mechanical “Doll” that would respond to basic verbal commands and even dad the emotions on one’s face and respond accordingly.
I would consider an video gaming AAA to be thinking rationally based on the percentages of success based on each action. But allow an AAA to grow on its own, ever learning and ever questioning, would be one hell of a feature in the advancement in technology. Of course, these effects could get way out of hand but we’ll leave that discussion for some other time. 2) Responding to 1. 11) Generally speaking, computers do only what the programmer allows them to do.
But more specifically, the algorithms and functions can get so implicated that the programmer itself would not be
What I mean by this is if in fact here is some algorithm that can act independently by accessing information from other algorithms via a large database such as the internet, then we can talk about computer intelligence. Or if the computer can learn on its own or contain human characteristics in the problem solving area. I would say that the latter statement of computers doing only what the programmer tell them does in a way imply the former statement that computers cannot be intelligent.
Based on one definition of intelligence that I agree with, “The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills,” o can definitely see that a computer has no real knowledge or skill and all It contains are conditional statements and complex algorithms to solve the Issue at hand. There Is no knowledge or skills that Is derived from the computer Itself. This Is reflected off of the programmer giving a computer it’s “mind”. But if for some reason into it, that is when it has some sort of independent thinking and where intelligence can finally develop. ) When talking about depth perception, we can split this up into 3 different views; 2 dimensional, 2. Dimensional, and 3 Dimensional model. The 2-D model is a very basic scene. Think of it as a very quick artist’s sketch of what he sees which often highlights main events but lacks vivid detail of the whole scene. The 2. 5 D is pretty much a scene in full detail portrayed by the artist often using deceptive techniques to trick the human eye for texture and depth. 3-D of course is the image of the scene itself in full detail as if you were there.
The first level (“computational level”) talks about the input/output to the system. In this sense, the input could be the image that our retina perceives while the output could be the brain’s identification of objects within this image. There are many different types of input depending on what the human eye is looking at. Some examples of this are shade/shadows, depth, texture, size perspective, overlap, and many other different inputs. Output wise is all produce in the image we perceive from the different inputs. The (algorithmic level) describes the procedure where input is converted to output.
In this case would be how the mages our eyes can process to achieve what we want to see in the computational level. Based on the various different visual cues given by the input, our mind takes the images and processes them in a way our mind may or may not understand. This procedure done mostly without us knowing it provides us with the way we see the world. Lastly, the (“implementation level”) describes how our own biological hardware implement these procedures described in the algorithmic level. Basically how our brain takes in the input and algorithms and converts it to something manageable to physically see.