Jump to content

Talk:History of artificial intelligence: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 1172450419 by 152.57.126.194 (talk)
m Reverted edit by 2409:4042:699:AA65:0:0:29BF:F8AC (talk) to last version by Gnomingstuff
 
(58 intermediate revisions by 32 users not shown)
Line 22: Line 22:
|topic=engtech
|topic=engtech
}}
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WPBS |1=
{{WikiProject History of Science|class=|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject History of Science|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Computing|class=|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Computing|importance=high}}
{{Vital article|topic=History|level=5|class=}}
}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config | algo = old(365d) | archive = Talk:History of artificial intelligence/Archive %(counter)d | counter = 1 | maxarchivesize = 150K | archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | minthreadsleft = 10 }}
{{User:MiszaBot/config | algo = old(365d) | archive = Talk:History of artificial intelligence/Archive %(counter)d | counter = 1 | maxarchivesize = 150K | archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | minthreadsleft = 10 }}


==GA Reassessment==
==Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment==
{{Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/History of artificial intelligence/1}}
[[File:Sciences humaines.svg|40px]] This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available [[Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/UNIVERSITY_OF_CHICAGO/Science,_Culture,_and_Society_III_(Spring_2017)|on the course page]]. Student editor(s): [[User:VjiaoBlack|VjiaoBlack]].


==Wiki Education assignment: Technology and Culture==
{{small|Above undated message substituted from [[Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment]] by [[User:PrimeBOT|PrimeBOT]] ([[User talk:PrimeBOT|talk]]) 23:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)}}
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Purdue/Technology_and_Culture_(Fall_2023) | assignments = [[User:Ferna235|Ferna235]] | start_date = 2023-08-21 | end_date = 2023-12-15 }}
== Please protect the "neats" and "scruffies" ==


<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:Thecanyon|Thecanyon]] ([[User talk:Thecanyon|talk]]) 05:33, 12 December 2023 (UTC)</span>
I just read those terms are being deleted. Please protect them. It was very important.
To be honest, this is going to come back.
"neats" are challenging Deep Learning who are for them the new "scruffies".
Just see Judea Pearl:[https://twitter.com/yudapearl neat] to see this in progress.
[[User:Hectorpal|Hectorpal]] ([[User talk:Hectorpal|talk]]) 16:36, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
:: Neats and scruffies is only a term used by SOME in the AI community (historically, Schank is the only person to be associated with it). It is also a popular characterisation in many areas of academia, and is rarely used in the actual history of AI--except by those who consider themselves on one side or the other. Labeling diminishes the efforts of various schools and the wide variety of crossover. Suggest leaving the battle to the actual WIKI entry on Neats and Scruffies. Keep history entry about the actual events and not the insider squabbling. [[User:TrainTracking1|TrainTracking1]] ([[User talk:TrainTracking1|talk]]) 20:22, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
::: [[User:Hectorpal|Hectorpal]], your link to archetypal neat URL is a 404. Did you mean this [https://twitter.com/yudapearl neat]? --[[User:FeralOink|FeralOink]] ([[User talk:FeralOink|talk]]) 14:51, 8 July 2021 (UTC)<s>BTW you have a great LinkedIn pic! [[User:TrainTracking1|TrainTracking1]], as an uninvolved editor, I would keep the neats and scruffies and improve the sourcing to McDuck please see my comment below. I am tempted to PROD her BLP. This is what it consists of at the moment:
:::::<blockquote>McCorduck grew up in California and attended the University of California, Berkeley, from which she graduated in 1960. McCorduck was invited to contribute to a book of readings on artificial intelligence while a senior at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1960. At the time she did not know what artificial intelligence was. McCorduck lived for more than forty years in New York City with her husband Joseph F. Traub. After her husband's death she moved back to California, where she had grown up. She now lies [sic] in San Francisco.</blockquote>
::: Word count for "McCorduck" is 74 on this article.--[[User:FeralOink|FeralOink]] ([[User talk:FeralOink|talk]]) 10:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)</s>
:::: [[User:FeralOink|FeralOink]], yes, thanks. Fixed. --[[User:Hectorpal|Hectorpal]] ([[User talk:Hectorpal|talk]]) 02:09, 1 August 2021 (UTC)


== 19th century fiction ==
@TrainTracking1: Absolute incorrect on all counts. It was only used 1975-1985. It is mentioned in the history section leading AI textbook, Russell & Norvig. It is mentioned in both of the most popular and respected histories of AI, Crevier and McCorduck. It wasn't not unique to Schank (at the time, I didn't even know it was Schank who came up with it). It was the topic of talks and symposiums at AAAI. It was addressed in the presidential address of AAAI several times. Papers were written about it (usually including the "procedural/declarative distinction"). Also the rivalry between MIT and Stanford was very real -- each side thought the other was dead wrong.


Shouldn't E. T. A. Hoffman's stories ( The Sandman (1816) and Automata (1814) ) be mentioned? [[User:Kdammers|Kdammers]] ([[User talk:Kdammers|talk]]) 21:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
I agree that, by 1985, everybody was sick of hearing about it. A lot of worthless papers were written about it, papers that were trying to establish some kind of new paradigm for the field or their own "better" definition of AI and so on. These kind of papers are useless, boring and a dime a dozen. People still write these kinds of papers today, e.g. "Defining 'Synthetic Consciousness'". They are just as useless now.


:In my opinion, this article has too many fictional and mythological precursors already. [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 08:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
But that doesn't mean that scruffy/neat doesn't raise an interesting question about AI. Is there a simple and elegant "master algorithm" for AGI? Or do we necessarily have to solve a lot of messy unrelated problems? ---- [[User:CharlesGillingham|CharlesGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesGillingham|talk]]) 19:48, 8 July 2021 (UTC)


== AI has surpassed human intelligence in some specific fields ==
Forgive, I didn't realize we talked about this a few months ago. Forgive me for restating my position. ---- [[User:CharlesGillingham|CharlesGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesGillingham|talk]]) 19:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)


Why is it no relevant?
Here is a reference on neat vs scruffy. Minsky, Marvin L. "Logical versus analogical or symbolic versus connectionist or neat versus scruffy." AI magazine 12.2 (1991): 34-34. [https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/aimagazine/article/view/894]. 473 citations in Google Scholar. The expressions belong in the history of AI.<unsigned comment>


By 2023, generative artificial intelligence has already surpassed human intelligence in some specific areas such as the search for new proteins and [[strategy games|strategy games]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://edge9-hwupgrade-it.translate.goog/news/data/chatgpt-e-ia-autonoma-urge-una-regolamento-l-appello-degli-scienziati_121198.html?_x_tr_sl=it&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=it&_x_tr_pto=wapp#google_vignette|title=The scientists' appeal|quote=A paper by work of various university researchers ... in very narrow fields such as protein folding or strategy games, AI has surpassed human capabilities.}}</ref> [[Special:Contributions/176.200.82.175|176.200.82.175]] ([[User talk:176.200.82.175|talk]]) 08:33, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
::At least one mention of [[neats and scruffies]] seems justified, especially since there is an already extant Wikipedia article on the subject in the context of AI. I'll see if or where it might fit in this article. Maybe the above source will be useful, whomever deposited it here.--[[User:FeralOink|FeralOink]] ([[User talk:FeralOink|talk]]) 10:33, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


::I am doing a major re-write and update of [[neats and scruffies]] as the sources aren't great, and as such, dates and context are missing in a lot of places. See [[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Neats_and_scruffies&type=revision&diff=1036752945&oldid=1020081535 my revisions here to date]], if anyone is curious.--[[User:FeralOink|FeralOink]] ([[User talk:FeralOink|talk]]) 14:06, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

== There are 74 hits on McCorduck in this article ==

They are all in the sources, but that still seems like a lot. Better sources added incrementally over time might be good. I am only suggesting, and realize I can do that too. Help out, that is.--[[User:FeralOink|FeralOink]] ([[User talk:FeralOink|talk]]) 14:55, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

:McCorduck wrote the definitive history of AI. There is no better source. The fact that there are so many references to it is an indication that this article uses only the most reliable sources -- no fringe points of view, no random semi-relevant contributions. Just the mainstream, consensus understanding of the history of AI.

:I would argue that articles about established academic topics (such as history) are more likely to reliable if they depend on ''less'' sources, not more -- or even just one: the most respected mainstream source. The other random sources tend to be about topics that are either unimportant, fringe, or (at worst) self-serving. ---- [[User:CharlesGillingham|CharlesGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesGillingham|talk]]) 19:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

:::Completely disagree about McCorduck and "the definitive history." Her book was published in 1979, well before the commercial development of AI--and its attendant developers and corporate purveyors--was even established (ranging from Symbolics and LISP Machine to Intellicorp and Inference). In fact, her only association with the commercial rise of AI was her work with Feigenbaum, which left them both on the wrong side of the "Fifth Generation" call to arms. To state that the use of her as the most oft-cited source is indicative of nothing . . . other than familiarity with her work by an early Wiki editor on the topic of AI. (That's a fallacy akin to saying the existence of so many yellow cars in NYC is indicative of that being the best choice of colors for cars.) Other writers, like Norvig, Freedman, Newquist, and Crevier wrote about the rise of commercial AI in much more detail than McCorduck--essentially because she barely touched on it at all. To cite her, or any single author, as the creator of the definitive history is simply misguided and biased. And, of course, leans into the bias of using only one predominant source. McCorduck is not the only highly-regarded chronicler of AI, nor should she (or anyone else) be given that title. Let's get some more sources in here. [[User:TrainTracking1|TrainTracking1]] ([[User talk:TrainTracking1|talk]]) 06:17, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

:::Arguing in favor of historical articles being best if dependent on a single historical source is antithetical to a balanced point of view (unless for an historical article which occurred, say, prior to 400 B.C. and sources are scarce.) For History of AI, single-sourcing will almost certainly result in WP:UNDUE and WP:NPOV for the article overall. Thank you for the suggestions, [[User:TrainTracking1|TrainTracking1]]. I will try to find more written by Norvig, Freedman et al. I encourage other editors to do similarly. A great deal has happened in the history of AI that post-dates 1979 (publication of McCorduck's book), but is still part of the history—not the present—of artificial intelligence.--[[User:FeralOink|FeralOink]] ([[User talk:FeralOink|talk]]) 10:25, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

== Qualifying the Victory of the Neats: Updating a Section Name from the "Victory of the Neats" to "Probabilistic Reasoning and Greater Rigor" and Updating the Text ==

I see there was a lot of discussion on this talk page about whether to preserve 'Neats vs Scruffies' or remove it.

The latest version Russell & Norvig's, AI: A Modern Approach differs from the second edition cited earlier by changing the last sentence of the footnote on P.25 of the 2nd edition and P. 24 of the 4th edition from "Whether that stability will be disrupted by a new scruffy idea is another question" to --now-- "The present emphasis on deep learning may represent a resurgence of the scruffies."

I think the new Russell & Norvig characterization there as and historical breakdown better describes that section, so I am changing the name to more closely match what they have. I'm also trying minimize disruption and flow of the article. I had planned on just dropping the part of the sentence "...and the victory of the neats" in [[History of artificial intelligence#CITEREFRussellNorvig2003|Russell & Norvig (2003)]] describe this as nothing less than a "revolution" and "the victory of the [[Neats and scruffies|neats]]".

But since I can see why others care about that the 'neats vs scruffies' view and possible future application, I am adding:

They had argued in their 2002 textbook that this increased rigor could be viewed plausibly as a "victory of the neats,"<ref name="AI Intro 2nd Edition">{{Cite book |last1=Russell |first1=Stuart J. |title=Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach |last2=Norvig |first2=Peter |date=2002-12-01 |publisher=Prentice Hall |isbn=978-0-13-790395-5 |edition=2nd edition |location=Upper Saddle River, N.J}}</ref> but subsequently qualified that by saying, in their 2020 AI textbook, that "The present emphasis on deep learning may represent a resurgence of the scruffies."<ref name="AI Intro 4th Edition">{{Cite book |last1=Russell |first1=Stuart |title=Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach |last2=Norvig |first2=Peter |date=2020-04-28 |publisher=Pearson |isbn=978-0-13-461099-3 |edition=4th edition |location=Hoboken}}</ref> [[User:Veritas Aeterna|Veritas Aeterna]] ([[User talk:Veritas Aeterna|talk]]) 23:30, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}
{{reflist-talk}}


:This is correct. FYI, The articles [[neats and scruffies]] and [[artificial intelligence]] have also been updated to reflect Russell and Norvig's (2021) clarification. I think I'm going to just delete this discussion from this article for brevity, because the section doesn't need to talk about neats & scruffies at all. ---- [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 22:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
:I think this belongs in the article [[progress in artificial intelligence]]. This article is very long and we can only cover the most notable developments. ---- [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 02:29, 17 November 2023 (UTC)


:Also, the article needs a major overhaul in the sections post-2010. This source may turn out to be useful in a rewrite. ---- [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 02:29, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
==Google, 2022==
In 2022, Google is told to Havel developed an AI that is 158 million times faster than the world's fasterst supercomputer (source: [https://medium.com/predict/googles-quantum-computer-is-about-158-million-times-faster-than-the-world-s-fastest-supercomputer-36df56747f7f#:~:text=This%20makes%20Google's%20quantum%20computer,photons%2C%20electrons%20and%20atomic%20nuclei. Medium.com]) <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/151.38.135.105|151.38.135.105]] ([[User talk:151.38.135.105#top|talk]]) 20:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Knowledge Base Engineering ==
Which is what we called it. Now, they're using Knowledge-based Engineering. But, it represents that each boom/(supposed) bust cycle left something of value. [[Knowledge-based_engineering]] supported one large program as it met demands of producing a new aircraft through all of the required phases. The results were so impressive that subsequent programs adapted the method into their processes as it evolved which is to be expected with computational systems. From a Lisp machine to Unix and then to the PC (all the time, multi-platformed with huge data requirements), we can trace the evolution to a domain which still exists. We need to pull together documentation about this phenomenal reality. ...


==Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA23 - Sect 202 - Thu==
This motivated by looking at papers from a Kansas State University Conference Software-based Software Development in October of 1986 (30 years after Darmouth) that had representatives from every effort extant at the time including those who brought about KBE (see Talk page of [[ICAD (software)]] (Real example needed) for more details). I have been collecting examples of my project, Multiple Surface Join and Offset (MSJO), part of whose focus was supporting the use of free-form NURBS with the solid modeling of the time.
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/New_York_University/Research_Process_and_Methodology_-_FA23_-_Sect_202_-_Thu_(Fall,_2023) | assignments = [[User:Lotsobear555|Lotsobear555]] | start_date = 2023-09-06 | end_date = 2023-12-14 }}


<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:Lotsobear555|Lotsobear555]] ([[User talk:Lotsobear555|talk]]) 15:38, 18 November 2023 (UTC)</span>
Anecdote? One program was to use only computational modeling but within the known constraints of the engineering processes involved. This was a huge step taken jointly with CAD/CAD/CAM systems. Computing performed. Paper modes diminished drastically. One other consequence? Known modes potentially became less stable. That is a continual concern as we improve.


== Cut for brevity / lack of notability ==
One thing to discuss? What remnants carried forward through all of the summer/winter cycles? 1st. Lisp. User interfaces. 2nd. ?, Third, KBE and more.


And, what will be the one(s) from the current event? [[User:JMSwtlk|jmswtlk]] ([[User talk:JMSwtlk|talk]]) 15:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
None of the major overviews (Russell & Norvig, McCorduck, Crevier, Nilsson, Newquist) mention WABOT, as far as I know. ---- [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 19:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)


{{Box|
:I'm not sure what you mean. Is there something we should change or add? ---- [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 22:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
====Automata====
In Japan, [[Waseda University]] initiated the WABOT project in 1967, and in 1972 completed the WABOT-1, the world's first full-scale "intelligent" [[humanoid robot]],<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.humanoid.waseda.ac.jp/booklet/kato_2-j.html | title=Humanoid History -WABOT-}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tQqVCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA66|title=Robotics and Mechatronics: Proceedings of the 4th IFToMM International Symposium on Robotics and Mechatronics|first1=Saïd|last1=Zeghloul|first2=Med Amine|last2=Laribi|first3=Jean-Pierre|last3=Gazeau|date=21 September 2015|publisher=Springer|isbn=978-3-319-22368-1 |via=Google Books}}</ref> or [[Android (robot)|android]]. Its limb control system allowed it to walk with the lower limbs, and to grip and transport objects with hands, using tactile sensors. Its vision system allowed it to measure distances and directions to objects using external receptors, artificial eyes and ears. Its conversation system allowed it to communicate with a person in Japanese, with an artificial mouth.<ref name="androidworld.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.androidworld.com/prod06.htm|title=Historical Android Projects|work=androidworld.com}}</ref><ref>[https://archive.org/details/robotsfromscienc0000ichb ''Robots: From Science Fiction to Technological Revolution''], page 130</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NgLLBQAAQBAJ&pg=SA3-PA1|title=Handbook of Digital Human Modeling: Research for Applied Ergonomics and Human Factors Engineering|first=Vincent G.|last=Duffy|date=19 April 2016|publisher=CRC Press|isbn=978-1-4200-6352-3 |via=Google Books}}</ref>
{{reflist|talk}}
}} [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 19:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)


==GA Reassessment==
{{Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/History of artificial intelligence/1}}


Cut this as well for brevity. I'm under the impression that specialized hardware did not have last influence and wasn't widely used. Most work was on digital computers and the most influential work of the time (1980s) was theoretical.
==Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SU23 - Sect 200 - Thu==
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/New_York_University/Research_Process_and_Methodology_-_SU23_-_Sect_200_-_Thu_(Summer) | assignments = [[User:NoemieCY|NoemieCY]], [[User:Nonasus|Nonasus]] | start_date = 2023-05-24 | end_date = 2023-08-10 }}

<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:NoemieCY|NoemieCY]] ([[User talk:NoemieCY|talk]]) 10:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)</span>

== Temporarily parking some stuff here ==

I'm going to find a place for this elsewhere in Wikipedia. It's undue weight in this article. ---- [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 23:38, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
{{Box|
{{Box|
The development of [[metal–oxide–semiconductor]] (MOS) [[very-large-scale integration]] (VLSI), in the form of [[complementary MOS]] ([[CMOS]]) technology, enabled the development of practical [[artificial neural network]] technology in the 1980s.
In the early 19th century, [[Charles Babbage]] designed a programmable computer (the [[Analytical Engine]]), although it was never built.{{sfn|Newquist|1994|p=67}} [[Ada Lovelace]] speculated that the machine "might compose elaborate and scientific pieces of music of any degree of complexity or extent".{{sfn|Menabrea|Lovelace|1843}} (She is often credited as the first programmer because of [[Ada Byron's notes on the analytical engine|a set of notes]] she wrote that completely detail a method for calculating [[Bernoulli numbers]] with the Engine.)

[[Percy Ludgate]], a clerk to a corn merchant in Dublin Ireland, independently designed a programmable mechanical computer, which he described in a work that was published in 1909.<ref>{{Harvtxt|Randall|1982|p=4–5}}; {{Harvtxt|Byrne|2012}}; {{Harvtxt|Mulvihill|2012}}</ref>

[[File:Ajedrecista_segundo1.JPG|thumb|right|"[[El Ajedrecista]]" (The Chessplayer), interior view.]]
[[Leonardo Torres Quevedo]]'s ''Essays on Automatics'' (1914)<ref>
{{Harvtxt|Quevedo|1914}}; {{Harvtxt|Quevedo|1915}}</ref>
introduced a calculating machine that used electromechanical parts which introduced the idea of [[floating-point arithmetic]].{{sfn|Randall|1982|p=6, 11–13}}
Torres is also known for having built in 1912 an autonomous machine capable of playing chess, ''[[El Ajedrecista]]''. As opposed to [[Mechanical Turk|The Turk]] and [[Ajeeb]], ''El Ajedrecista'' (The Chessplayer) had a true integrated automation. It only played an [[Chess endgame|endgame]] with three [[chess piece]]s, automatically moving a white [[King (chess)|king]] and a [[Rook (chess)|rook]] to [[checkmate]] the black king moved by a human opponent.<ref>{{Harvtxt|Williams|2017}}; {{Harvtxt|Randall|1982|pp=6, 11–13}}; {{Harvtxt|Jiménez|2004}}</ref>

[[Vannevar Bush]]'s paper ''Instrumental Analysis'' (1936) discussed using existing IBM punch card machines to implement Babbage's design. In the same year, he started the Rapid Arithmetical Machine project to investigate the problems of constructing an electronic digital computer.{{sfn|Randall|1982|pp= 13, 16–17}}


A landmark publication in the field was the 1989 book ''Analog VLSI Implementation of Neural Systems'' by Carver A. Mead and Mohammed Ismail.<ref name="Mead">{{cite book|url=http://fennetic.net/irc/Christopher%20R.%20Carroll%20Carver%20Mead%20Mohammed%20Ismail%20Analog%20VLSI%20Implementation%20of%20Neural%20Systems.pdf|title=Analog VLSI Implementation of Neural Systems|date=8 May 1989|publisher=[[Kluwer Academic Publishers]]|isbn=978-1-4613-1639-8|last1=Mead|first1=Carver A.|last2=Ismail|first2=Mohammed|series=The Kluwer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science|volume=80|location=Norwell, MA|doi=10.1007/978-1-4613-1639-8}}</ref>
{{realist-talk}}
{{realist-talk}}
}} ---- [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 04:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)


== Protein structure prediction ==
* {{Cite web
| title= The John Gabriel Byrne Computer Science Collection
| date = 8 Dec 2012
| last = Byrne | first = J. G.
| url = https://scss.tcd.ie/SCSSTreasuresCatalog/miscellany/TCD-SCSS-X.20121208.002/TCD-SCSS-X.20121208.002.pdf/ |access-date=2019-08-08
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20190416071721/https://www.scss.tcd.ie/SCSSTreasuresCatalog/miscellany/TCD-SCSS-X.20121208.002/TCD-SCSS-X.20121208.002.pdf |archive-date=2019-04-16
| url-status=dead
}}
* {{Cite web|title=Ingenious Ireland
| last = Mulvihill | first = Mary
| date = October 17, 2012
| url = http://ingeniousireland.ie/2012/10/1909-a-novel-irish-computer/
}}
* {{citation
| last = Quevedo | first = L. Torres Quevedo
| work = Ensayos sobre Automática – Su definicion. Extension teórica de sus aplicaciones
| title = Revista de la Academia de Ciencias Exacta
| volume = 12
| pages = 391–418
| year = 1914
}}
* {{citation
| last = Quevedo | first = L. Torres Quevedo
| year = 1915
| work = Essais sur l'Automatique - Sa définition. Etendue théorique de ses applications
| title = Revue Génerale des Sciences Pures et Appliquées
| volume = 2
| pages = 601–611
| url = https://diccan.com/dicoport/Torres.htm
}}
* {{Cite book
|last=Williams|first=Andrew
|date=2017-03-16
|title=History of Digital Games: Developments in Art, Design and Interaction
|publisher=CRC Press
|isbn=9781317503811
|language=en
|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xLVdDgAAQBAJ&dq=Torres+and+his+remarkable+automatic+devices.+Issue+2079+of+Scientific+American,+1915&pg=PA30
}}
* {{citation
| last = Randall | first = Brian
| year = 1982
| title = From Analytical Engine to Electronic Digital Computer: The Contributions of Ludgate, Torres, and Bush
| website = fano.co.uk
| url = http://www.fano.co.uk/ludgate/
| access-date = 29 October 2018
}}
* {{citation
| last = Jiménez | first = Ramón
| date = July 20, 2004
| title = The Rook Endgame Machine of Torres y Quevedo
| url = http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1799
}}
* {{Citation | last = Newquist | first = HP | title=The Brain Makers: Genius, Ego, And Greed in the Quest For Machines That Think | year = 1994 | author-link=HP Newquist |location= New York|publisher=Macmillan/SAMS | isbn=978-0-9885937-1-8 |oclc=313139906}}
* {{Citation
| last1=Menabrea |first1=Luigi Federico | title=Sketch of the Analytical Engine Invented by Charles Babbage
| url= http://www.fourmilab.ch/babbage/sketch.html | year=1843
| last2=Lovelace | first2=Ada
| author-link=Ada Lovelace
| journal=[[Scientific Memoirs]] |volume=3
|access-date=2008-08-29}} With notes upon the Memoir by the Translator


There is one domain where Deep learning (not yet called that) was successful as early as the end of 1980s, the prediction of protein structures. People like Terry Sejnowski started to use neural net to predict secondary structures
}} [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 23:38, 29 July 2023 (UTC)


N Qian, TJ Sejnowski (1988) Predicting the secondary structure of globular proteins using neural network models. Journal of molecular biology, 202 (4): 865-884 (cited 1700 times)
== Cutting a section for brevity ==


And in 1993, Rost and Sander proposed a cascading neural net structure, PHD, that basically killed the field by reaching theoretical maximum accuracy.
Don't think this section was essential to the article, and I'm getting ready to add a bunch of material about 21st century. ---- [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
{{Box|
===Predictions (or "Where is HAL 9000?")===
In 1968, [[Arthur C. Clarke]] and [[Stanley Kubrick]] had imagined that, by the year 2001, a machine would exist with an intelligence that matched or exceeded the capability of human beings. The character they created, [[HAL 9000]], was based on a belief shared by many leading AI researchers that such a machine would exist by the year 2001.<ref>{{Harvnb|Newquist|1994|pp=134}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Crevier|1993|pp=108–109}}</ref>

In 2001, AI founder [[Marvin Minsky]] asked "So the question is why didn't we get HAL in 2001?"<ref>He goes on to say: "The answer is, I believe we could have ... I once went to an international conference on neural net[s]. There were 40 thousand registrants ... but ... if you had an international conference, for example, on using multiple representations for common sense reasoning, I've only been able to find 6 or 7 people in the whole world." {{Harvnb|Minsky|2001}}</ref> Minsky believed that the answer is that the central problems, like [[commonsense reasoning]], were being neglected, while most researchers pursued things like commercial applications of [[neural nets]] or [[genetic algorithms]]. [[John McCarthy (computer scientist)|John McCarthy]], on the other hand, still blamed the [[qualification problem]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Maker|2006}}</ref> For [[Ray Kurzweil]], the issue is computer power and, using [[Moore's Law]], he predicted that machines with human-level intelligence will appear by 2029.<ref>{{Harvnb|Kurzweil|2005}}</ref> [[Jeff Hawkins]] argued that neural net research ignores the essential properties of the human [[cerebral cortex|cortex]], preferring simple models that have been successful at solving simple problems.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hawkins|Blakeslee|2004}}</ref> There were many other explanations and for each there was a corresponding research program underway.

{{realist-talk}}
}} [[User:CharlesTGillingham|CharlesTGillingham]] ([[User talk:CharlesTGillingham|talk]]) 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)


Rost, Burkhard, and Chris Sander (1993) Improved prediction of protein secondary structure by use of sequence profiles and neural networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 90.16: 7558-7562. (cited 3900 times)
পিক


(well, the absolute best was actually PsiPred, an improvement by David Jones a bit later, using profile matrices rather than multiple sequence alignments
[[Special:Contributions/202.86.218.6|202.86.218.6]] ([[User talk:202.86.218.6|talk]]) 23:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)


McGuffin, Liam J., Kevin Bryson, and David T. Jones (2000) The PSIPRED protein structure prediction server." Bioinformatics 16.4: 404-405. (cited > 4000 times)).
Stkcar [[Special:Contributions/118.179.0.50|118.179.0.50]] ([[User talk:118.179.0.50|talk]]) 13:49, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:10, 1 January 2025

Former good articleHistory of artificial intelligence was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 28, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
October 18, 2008Good article nomineeListed
July 13, 2023Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

GA Reassessment

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result: Consensus to delist. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:28, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page of this 2008 listing was tagged by SandyGeorgia as requiring a GAR; I must agree. The article has not been updated to the sufficient standard after 2010; this is especially egregious considering the massive leaps in AI over the last decade.

Thus, I'll tag it as needing an {{update}}, and nominate this for delisting as failing GA criterion 3. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:50, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this article needs huge amounts of work and updating to be at standard. Should be delisted unless someone takes that on. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:21, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
agree, should be delisted. Section for 2011 is really outdated and needs a huge amount of work Artem.G (talk) 06:21, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Needs significant effort. If anyone steps forward to work on this article, please ping me. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:28, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wiki Education assignment: Technology and Culture

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ferna235 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Thecanyon (talk) 05:33, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19th century fiction

[edit]

Shouldn't E. T. A. Hoffman's stories ( The Sandman (1816) and Automata (1814) ) be mentioned? Kdammers (talk) 21:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, this article has too many fictional and mythological precursors already. CharlesTGillingham (talk) 08:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AI has surpassed human intelligence in some specific fields

[edit]

Why is it no relevant?

By 2023, generative artificial intelligence has already surpassed human intelligence in some specific areas such as the search for new proteins and strategy games.[1] 176.200.82.175 (talk) 08:33, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "The scientists' appeal". A paper by work of various university researchers ... in very narrow fields such as protein folding or strategy games, AI has surpassed human capabilities.
I think this belongs in the article progress in artificial intelligence. This article is very long and we can only cover the most notable developments. ---- CharlesTGillingham (talk) 02:29, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the article needs a major overhaul in the sections post-2010. This source may turn out to be useful in a rewrite. ---- CharlesTGillingham (talk) 02:29, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA23 - Sect 202 - Thu

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2023 and 14 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lotsobear555 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Lotsobear555 (talk) 15:38, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cut for brevity / lack of notability

[edit]

None of the major overviews (Russell & Norvig, McCorduck, Crevier, Nilsson, Newquist) mention WABOT, as far as I know. ---- CharlesTGillingham (talk) 19:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

====Automata====

In Japan, Waseda University initiated the WABOT project in 1967, and in 1972 completed the WABOT-1, the world's first full-scale "intelligent" humanoid robot,[1][2] or android. Its limb control system allowed it to walk with the lower limbs, and to grip and transport objects with hands, using tactile sensors. Its vision system allowed it to measure distances and directions to objects using external receptors, artificial eyes and ears. Its conversation system allowed it to communicate with a person in Japanese, with an artificial mouth.[3][4][5]

CharlesTGillingham (talk) 19:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Cut this as well for brevity. I'm under the impression that specialized hardware did not have last influence and wasn't widely used. Most work was on digital computers and the most influential work of the time (1980s) was theoretical.

The development of metal–oxide–semiconductor (MOS) very-large-scale integration (VLSI), in the form of complementary MOS (CMOS) technology, enabled the development of practical artificial neural network technology in the 1980s.

A landmark publication in the field was the 1989 book Analog VLSI Implementation of Neural Systems by Carver A. Mead and Mohammed Ismail.[1]

References

  1. ^ Mead, Carver A.; Ismail, Mohammed (8 May 1989). Analog VLSI Implementation of Neural Systems (PDF). The Kluwer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science. Vol. 80. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-1639-8. ISBN 978-1-4613-1639-8.

---- CharlesTGillingham (talk) 04:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protein structure prediction

[edit]

There is one domain where Deep learning (not yet called that) was successful as early as the end of 1980s, the prediction of protein structures. People like Terry Sejnowski started to use neural net to predict secondary structures

N Qian, TJ Sejnowski (1988) Predicting the secondary structure of globular proteins using neural network models. Journal of molecular biology, 202 (4): 865-884 (cited 1700 times)

And in 1993, Rost and Sander proposed a cascading neural net structure, PHD, that basically killed the field by reaching theoretical maximum accuracy.

Rost, Burkhard, and Chris Sander (1993) Improved prediction of protein secondary structure by use of sequence profiles and neural networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 90.16: 7558-7562. (cited 3900 times)

(well, the absolute best was actually PsiPred, an improvement by David Jones a bit later, using profile matrices rather than multiple sequence alignments

McGuffin, Liam J., Kevin Bryson, and David T. Jones (2000) The PSIPRED protein structure prediction server." Bioinformatics 16.4: 404-405. (cited > 4000 times)).