Re: consciousness, and AI KR

"This also includes models of other agent’s beliefs and goals, i.e. a
theory of mind.  Agents also benefit from a model of past, present and
future, i.e. a functional episodic memory that complements encyclopaedic
memory, such as birds fly and dogs bark. Episodic memory enables agents to
reason about cause and effect, to understand intent, and to create and
adapt plans"

"If consciousness is seen as too overloaded a term, then what word would be
better for describing the subjective experience of artificial agents?  We
could then discuss how that experience depends on different capabilities,
e.g. episodic memory, theory of mind, behavioural norms, etc"

I quoted from two of Dave's messages. These seem to me aimed at more
concrete discussions, whether or not we use the term "consciousness". I'm
interested in the DARPA Explainable AI program and related efforts. This CG
seems to have a similar direction. Not just explainability but also to some
degree, openness / transportability / interoperability.

My background is completely in symbolic AI (expert systems) and knowledge
representation (mainly semweb tech today). I work alongside a machine
learning group and provide data for them. I am wondering how we can build
better integrated systems. What are the different capabilities that can
enable that?



On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 1:44 AM Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Patrick,
>
> My aim was to encourage analytic discussion on an AIKR perspective on
> consciousness rather than the many other potential perspectives.  One could
> argue about how to account for qualia from a philosophical perspective, but
> that is very different from consideration of how colours are handled in
> artificial neural networks, e.g. training a robot to count the number of
> red objects in a camera view. If consciousness is seen as too overloaded a
> term, then what word would be better for describing the subjective
> experience of artificial agents?  We could then discuss how that experience
> depends on different capabilities, e.g. episodic memory, theory of mind,
> behavioural norms, etc.  Is that of interest to you?
>
> On 24 Oct 2023, at 00:33, Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There are several terms here without even semi-formal definitions that are
> doing a lot of work, i.e. your claims are vague and difficult to discuss
> clearly let alone measure and assess.
>
> Given the wide berth of interpretation it's especially bold to claim a
> false dichotomy of either one agrees with your "facts" or one is relying on
> "faith".
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023, 10:42 AM Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:
>
>> From the AI KR and computational view consciousness isn’t a hard
>> problem.  Subjective experience distils to information processing with
>> systems of neurons. Redness is just a vector of neural activation. Agents
>> have situational awareness, i.e. a model of their current environment and
>> goals, enabling them to decide on what actions to take. This also includes
>> models of other agent’s beliefs and goals, i.e. a theory of mind.  Agents
>> also benefit from a model of past, present and future, i.e. a functional
>> episodic memory that complements encyclopaedic memory, such as birds fly
>> and dogs bark. Episodic memory enables agents to reason about cause and
>> effect, to understand intent, and to create and adapt plans.
>>
>> However, this won’t convince everyone.  Plenty of people have beliefs
>> that are a matter of faith rather than of facts. That’s fine. But
>> engineering and science doesn’t work that way!  AI will continue to evolve
>> and AGI is just a matter of time.  I attach a picture that makes the point.
>> A stochastic synthesis of ideas as evidence that artistic sensibility can
>> be reduced to neural processing.
>>
>>
>> > On 22 Oct 2023, at 05:38, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Consciousness is too huge a topic . Undecidable, too much can be said
>> about without ever reaching any conclusion, possibly because no single
>> theory or point of view can exhaust the subject. However
>> > I d like to suggest simply that it is tackled only in relation to AI
>> KR. Surely. consciousness is relevant to AI and to KR discussion and
>> potential standards. We should keep that in mind where possible and
>> parsimoniously limit our considerations accordingly
>> >
>> > I ll leave it to Carl to liaise with the WoT group, since he is a
>> member there and brought up the subject.
>> > I ll work on tidying up some of the resources shared on the list into
>> some form of coherent narrative when I can, that is my next task
>>
>> Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
>>
>>
>>
> Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
>
>
>
>