The Allure of Machinic Life:Cybernetics, Artificial Life, And

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Allure of Machinic Life:Cybernetics, Artificial Life, And computer science/artificial intelligence John Johnston is Professor of English and Comparative Litera- “John Johnston is to be applauded for his engaging and eminently readable assessment of the Johnston ture at Emory University in Atlanta. He is the author of Carnival new, interdisciplinary sciences aimed at designing and building complex, lifelike, intelligent The Allure of Machinic Life of Repetition and Information Multiplicity. machines. Cybernetics, information theory, chaos theory, artificial life, autopoiesis, connection- Cybernetics, Artificial Life, and the New AI ism, embodied autonomous agents—it’s all here!” —Mark Bedau, Professor of Philosophy and Humanities, Reed College, and Editor-in-Chief, John Johnston Artificial Life The Allure of Machinic Life Cover image: Of related interest In The Allure of Machinic Life, John Johnston examines new Joseph Nechvatal, ignudiO gustO majOr, computer-robotic-assisted acrylic on canvas, 66” x 120”. Photo courtesy Galerie Jean-Luc & Takako Richard. forms of nascent life that emerge through technical inter- © 2003 Joseph Nechvatal. How the Body Shapes the Way We Think Cybernetics, Artificial Life, and the New AI actions within human-constructed environments —“machinic A New View of Intelligence life” —in the sciences of cybernetics, artificial life, and artificial Rolf Pfeifer and Josh Bongard Life Allure of Machinic The intelligence. With the development of such research initiatives How could the body influence our thinking when it seems obvious that the brain controls the as the evolution of digital organisms, computer immune sys- body? In How the Body Shapes the Way We Think, Rolf Pfeifer and Josh Bongard demon- tems, artificial protocells, evolutionary robotics, and swarm strate that thought is not independent of the body but is tightly constrained, and at the same systems, Johnston argues, machinic life has achieved a com- time enabled, by it. They argue that the kinds of thoughts we are capable of have their foun- plexity and autonomy worthy of study in its own right. dation in our embodiment—in our morphology and the material properties of our bodies. Drawing on the publications of scientists as well as a range of work in contemporary philosophy and cultural theory, What Is Thought? but always with the primary focus on the “objects at hand” — Eric B. Baum the machines, programs, and processes that constitute ma- chinic life—Johnston shows how they come about, how they In What Is Thought? Eric Baum proposes a computational explanation of thought. Just as operate, and how they are already changing. This under- Erwin Schrödinger in his classic 1944 work What Is Life? argued ten years before the dis- standing is a necessary first step, he further argues, that covery of DNA that life must be explainable at a fundamental level by physics and chemistry, must precede speculation about the meaning and cultural Baum contends that the present-day inability of computer science to explain thought and implications of these new forms of life. meaning is no reason to doubt that there can be such an explanation. Baum argues that the Developing the concept of the “computational assem- complexity of mind is the outcome of evolution, which has built thought processes that act blage” (a machine and its associated discourse) as a frame- unlike the standard algorithms of computer science, and that to understand the mind we work to identify both resemblances and differences in form need to understand these thought processes and the evolutionary process that produced and function, Johnston offers a conceptual history of each of them in computational terms. the three sciences. He considers the new theory of machines proposed by cybernetics from several perspectives, includ- ing Lacanian psychoanalysis and “machinic philosophy.” He A Bradford Book The MIT Press Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142 http://mitpress.mit.edu examines the history of the new science of artificial life and its relation to theories of evolution, emergence, and complex adaptive systems (as illustrated by a series of experiments carried out on various software platforms). He describes the history of artificial intelligence as a series of unfolding con- ceptual conflicts—decodings and recodings—leading to a John Johnston “new AI” that is strongly influenced by artificial life. Finally, in examining the role played by neuroscience in several con- temporary research initiatives, he shows how further success 978-0-262-10126-4 in the building of intelligent machines will most likely result from progress in our understanding of how the human brain actually works. The Allure of Machinic Life THE ALLURE OF MACHINIC LIFE Cybernetics, Artificial Life, and the New AI John Johnston A Bradford Book The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England 6 2008 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. For information about special quantity discounts, please email [email protected] .edu This book was set in Times New Roman and Syntax on 3B2 by Asco Typesetters, Hong Kong. Printed and bound in the United States of America. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Johnston, John Harvey, 1947– The allure of machinic life : cybernetics, artificial life, and the new AI / John Johnston p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-262-10126-4 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Cybernetics. 2. Artificial life. 3. Artificial intelligence. I. Title. Q310.J65 2008 0030.5—dc22 2008005358 10987654321 For Heidi Contents Preface ix Introduction 1 I FROM CYBERNETICS TO MACHINIC PHILOSOPHY 23 1 Cybernetics and the New Complexity of Machines 25 2 The In-Mixing of Machines: Cybernetics and Psychoanalysis 65 3 Machinic Philosophy: Assemblages, Information, Chaotic Flow 105 II MACHINIC LIFE 163 4 Vital Cells: Cellular Automata, Artificial Life, Autopoiesis 165 5 Digital Evolution and the Emergence of Complexity 215 III MACHINIC INTELLIGENCE 275 6 The Decoded Couple: Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science 277 7 The New AI: Behavior-Based Robotics, Autonomous Agents, and Artificial Evolution 337 8 Learning from Neuroscience: New Prospects for Building Intelligent Machines 385 Notes 415 Index 453 Preface This book explores a single topic: the creation of new forms of ‘‘machinic life’’ in cybernetics, artificial life (ALife), and artificial intelligence (AI). By machinic life I mean the forms of nascent life that have been made to emerge in and through technical interactions in human-constructed envi- ronments. Thus the webs of connection that sustain machinic life are material (or virtual) but not directly of the natural world. Although au- tomata such as the eighteenth-century clockwork dolls and other figures can be seen as precursors, the first forms of machinic life appeared in the ‘‘lifelike’’ machines of the cyberneticists and in the early programs and robots of AI. Machinic life, unlike earlier mechanical forms, has a capac- ity to alter itself and to respond dynamically to changing situations. More sophisticated forms of machinic life appear in the late 1980s and 1990s, with computer simulations of evolving digital organisms and the construction of mobile, autonomous robots. The emergence of ALife as a scientific discipline—which o‰cially dates from the conference on ‘‘the synthesis and simulation of living systems’’ in 1987 organized by Christo- pher Langton—and the growing body of theoretical writings and new research initiatives devoted to autonomous agents, computer immune systems, artificial protocells, evolutionary robotics, and swarm systems have given the development of machinic life further momentum, solidity, and variety. These developments make it increasingly clear that while machinic life may have begun in the mimicking of the forms and pro- cesses of natural organic life, it has achieved a complexity and autonomy worthy of study in its own right. Indeed, this is my chief argument. While excellent books and articles devoted to these topics abound, there has been no attempt to consider them within a single, overarching theoretical framework. The challenge is to do so while respecting the very significant historical, conceptual, scientific, and technical di¤erences in this material and the diverse perspectives they give rise to. To meet this x Preface challenge I have tried to establish an inclusive vantage point that can be shared by specialized and general readers alike. At first view, there are obvious relations of precedence and influence in the distinctive histories of cybernetics, AI, and ALife. Without the groundbreaking discoveries and theoretical orientation of cybernetics, the sciences of AI and ALife would simply not have arisen and developed as they have. In both, more- over, the digital computer was an essential condition of possibility. Yet the development of the stored-program electronic computer was also con- temporary with the birth of cybernetics and played multiple roles of instigation, example, and relay for many of its most important conceptu- alizations. Thus the centrality of the computer results in a complicated nexus of historical and conceptual relationships among these three fields of research. But while the computer has been essential to the development of all three fields, its role in each has been di¤erent. For the cyberneticists
Recommended publications
  • Guiding Organic Management in a Service-Oriented Real-Time Middleware Architecture
    Guiding Organic Management in a Service-Oriented Real-Time Middleware Architecture Manuel Nickschas and Uwe Brinkschulte Institute for Computer Science University of Frankfurt, Germany {nickschas, brinks}@es.cs.uni-frankfurt.de Abstract. To cope with the ever increasing complexity of today's com- puting systems, the concepts of organic and autonomic computing have been devised. Organic or autonomic systems are characterized by so- called self-X properties such as self-conguration and self-optimization. This approach is particularly interesting in the domain of distributed, embedded, real-time systems. We have already proposed a service-ori- ented middleware architecture for such systems that uses multi-agent principles for implementing the organic management. However, organic management needs some guidance in order to take dependencies between services into account as well as the current hardware conguration and other application-specic knowledge. It is important to allow the appli- cation developer or system designer to specify such information without having to modify the middleware. In this paper, we propose a generic mechanism based on capabilities that allows describing such dependen- cies and domain knowledge, which can be combined with an agent-based approach to organic management in order to realize self-X properties. We also describe how to make use of this approach for integrating the middleware's organic management with node-local organic management. 1 Introduction Distributed, embedded systems are rapidly advancing in all areas of our lives, forming increasingly complex networks that are increasingly hard to handle for both system developers and maintainers. In order to cope with this explosion of complexity, also commonly referred to as the Software Crisis [1], the concepts of Autonomic [2,3] and Organic [4,5,6] Computing have been devised.
    [Show full text]
  • Close Engagements with Artificial Companions: Key Social, Psychological, Ethical and Design Issues
    OII / e-Horizons Forum Discussion Paper No. 14, January 2008 Close Engagements with Artificial Companions: Key Social, Psychological, Ethical and Design Issues by Malcolm Peltu Oxford Internet Institute Yorick Wilks Oxford Internet Institute OII / e-Horizons Forum Discussion Paper No. 14 Oxford Internet Institute University of Oxford 1 St Giles, Oxford OX1 3JS United Kingdom Forum Discussion Paper January 2008 © University of Oxford for the Oxford Internet Institute 2008 Close Engagements with Artificial Companions Foreword This paper summarizes discussions at the multidisciplinary forum1 held at the University of Oxford on 26 October 2007 entitled Artificial Companions in Society: Perspectives on the Present and Future, as well as an open meeting the previous day addressed by Sherry Turkle2. The event was organized by Yorick Wilks, Senior Research Fellow for the Oxford Internet Institute (OII)3, on behalf of the e-Horizons Institute4 and in association with the EU Integrated Project COMPANIONS. COMPANIONS is studying conversational software-based artificial agents that will get to know their owners over a substantial period. These could be developed to advise, comfort and carry out a wide range of functions to support diverse personal and social needs, such as to be ‘artificial companions’ for the elderly, helping their owners to learn, or assisting to sustain their owners’ fitness and health. The invited forum participants, including computer and social scientists, also discussed a range of related developments that use advanced artificial intelligence and human– computer interaction approaches. They examined key issues in building artificial companions, emphasizing their social, personal, emotional and ethical implications. This paper summarizes the main issues raised.
    [Show full text]
  • Organic Computing Doctoral Dissertation Colloquium 2018 B
    13 13 S. Tomforde | B. Sick (Eds.) Organic Computing Doctoral Dissertation Colloquium 2018 Organic Computing B. Sick (Eds.) B. | S. Tomforde S. Tomforde ISBN 978-3-7376-0696-7 9 783737 606967 V`:%$V$VGVJ 0QJ `Q`8 `8 V`J.:`R 1H@5 J10V`1 ? :VC Organic Computing Doctoral Dissertation Colloquium 2018 S. Tomforde, B. Sick (Editors) !! ! "#$%&'&$'$(&)(#(&$* + "#$%&'&$'$(&)(#$&,*&+ - .! ! /)!/#0// 12#$%'$'$()(#$, 23 & ! )))0&,)(#$' '0)/#5 6 7851 999!& ! kassel university press 7 6 Preface The Organic Computing Doctoral Dissertation Colloquium (OC-DDC) series is part of the Organic Computing initiative [9, 10] which is steered by a Special Interest Group of the German Society of Computer Science (Gesellschaft fur¨ Informatik e.V.). It provides an environment for PhD students who have their research focus within the broader Organic Computing (OC) community to discuss their PhD project and current trends in the corresponding research areas. This includes, for instance, research in the context of Autonomic Computing [7], ProActive Computing [11], Complex Adaptive Systems [8], Self-Organisation [2], and related topics. The main goal of the colloquium is to foster excellence in OC-related research by providing feedback and advice that are particularly relevant to the students’ studies and ca- reer development. Thereby, participants are involved in all stages of the colloquium organisation and the review process to gain experience. The OC-DDC 2018 took place in
    [Show full text]
  • Open Problems in Artificial Life
    Open Problems in Artificial Life Mark A. Bedau,† John S. McCaskill‡ Norman H. Packard§ Steen Rasmussen Chris Adami†† David G. Green‡‡ Takashi Ikegami§§ Abstract This article lists fourteen open problems in Kunihiko Kaneko artificial life, each of which is a grand challenge requiring a Thomas S. Ray††† major advance on a fundamental issue for its solution. Each problem is briefly explained, and, where deemed helpful, some promising paths to its solution are indicated. Keywords artificial life, evolution, self-organi- zation, emergence, self-replication, autopoeisis, digital life, artificial chemistry, selection, evolutionary learning, ecosystems, biosystems, astrobiology, evolvable hardware, dynamical hierarchies, origin of life, simulation, cultural evolution, 1 Introduction information theory At the dawn of the last century, Hilbert proposed a set of open mathematical problems. They proved to be an extraordinarily effective guideline for mathematical research in the following century. Based on a substantial body of existing mathematical theory, the challenges were both precisely formulated and positioned so that a significant body of missing theory needed to be developed to achieve their solution, thereby enriching mathematics as a whole. In contrast with mathematics, artificial life is quite young and essentially interdis- ciplinary. The phrase “artificial life” was coined by C. Langton [11], who envisaged an investigation of life as it is in the context of life as it could be. Although artificial life is fundamentally directed towards both the origins of biology and its future, the scope and complexity of its subject require interdisciplinary cooperation and collabo- ration. This broadly based area of study embraces the possibility of discovering lifelike behavior in unfamiliar settings and creating new and unfamiliar forms of life, and its major aim is to develop a coherent theory of life in all its manifestations, rather than an historically contingent documentation bifurcated by discipline.
    [Show full text]
  • Open-Endedness for the Sake of Open-Endedness
    Open-Endedness for the Sake Arend Hintze Michigan State University of Open-Endedness Department of Integrative Biology Department of Computer Science and Engineering BEACON Center for the Study of Evolution in Action [email protected] Abstract Natural evolution keeps inventing new complex and intricate forms and behaviors. Digital evolution and genetic algorithms fail to create the same kind of complexity, not just because we still lack the computational resources to rival nature, but Keywords because (it has been argued) we have not understood in principle how to create open-ended evolving systems. Much effort has been Open-ended evolution, computational model, complexity, diversity made to define such open-endedness so as to create forms of increasing complexity indefinitely. Here, however, a simple evolving computational system that satisfies all such requirements is presented. Doing so reveals a shortcoming in the definitions for open-ended evolution. The goal to create models that rival biological complexity remains. This work suggests that our current definitions allow for even simple models to pass as open-ended, and that our definitions of complexity and diversity are more important for the quest of open-ended evolution than the fact that something runs indefinitely. 1 Introduction Open-ended evolution has been identified as a key challenge in artificial life research [4]. Specifically, it has been acknowledged that there is a difference between an open-ended system and a system that just has a long run time. Large or slow systems will eventually converge on a solution, but open- ended systems will not and instead keep evolving. Interestingly, a system that oscillates or that is in a dynamic equilibrium [21] would continuously evolve, but does not count as an open-ended evolving system.
    [Show full text]
  • Artificial Intelligence: How Does It Work, Why Does It Matter, and What Can We Do About It?
    Artificial intelligence: How does it work, why does it matter, and what can we do about it? STUDY Panel for the Future of Science and Technology EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Philip Boucher Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA) PE 641.547 – June 2020 EN Artificial intelligence: How does it work, why does it matter, and what can we do about it? Artificial intelligence (AI) is probably the defining technology of the last decade, and perhaps also the next. The aim of this study is to support meaningful reflection and productive debate about AI by providing accessible information about the full range of current and speculative techniques and their associated impacts, and setting out a wide range of regulatory, technological and societal measures that could be mobilised in response. AUTHOR Philip Boucher, Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA), This study has been drawn up by the Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA), within the Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS) of the Secretariat of the European Parliament. To contact the publisher, please e-mail [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSION Original: EN Manuscript completed in June 2020. DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European Parliament as background material to assist them in their parliamentary work. The content of the document is the sole responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official position of the Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching and Learning with Digital Evolution: Factors Influencing Implementation and Student Outcomes
    TEACHING AND LEARNING WITH DIGITAL EVOLUTION: FACTORS INFLUENCING IMPLEMENTATION AND STUDENT OUTCOMES By Amy M Lark A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Curriculum, Instruction, and Teacher Education – Doctor of Philosophy 2014 ABSTRACT TEACHING AND LEARNING WITH DIGITAL EVOLUTION: FACTORS INFLUENCING IMPLEMENTATION AND STUDENT OUTCOMES By Amy M Lark Science literacy for all Americans has been the rallying cry of science education in the United States for decades. Regardless, Americans continue to fall short when it comes to keeping pace with other developed nations on international science education assessments. To combat this problem, recent national reforms have reinvigorated the discussion of what and how we should teach science, advocating for the integration of disciplinary core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and science practices. In the biological sciences, teaching the core idea of evolution in ways consistent with reforms is fraught with challenges. Not only is it difficult to observe biological evolution in action, it is nearly impossible to engage students in authentic science practices in the context of evolution. One way to overcome these challenges is through the use of evolving populations of digital organisms. Avida-ED is digital evolution software for education that allows for the integration of science practice and content related to evolution. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of Avida-ED on teaching and learning evolution and the nature of science. To accomplish this I conducted a nationwide, multiple-case study, documenting how instructors at various institutions were using Avida-ED in their classrooms, factors influencing implementation decisions, and effects on student outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • How Artificial Intelligence Works
    BRIEFING How artificial intelligence works From the earliest days of artificial intelligence (AI), its definition focused on how its results appear to show intelligence, rather than the methods that are used to achieve it. Since then, AI has become an umbrella term which can refer to a wide range of methods, both current and speculative. It applies equally well to tools that help doctors to identify cancer as it does to self-replicating robots that could enslave humanity centuries from now. Since AI is simultaneously represented as high-risk, low-risk and everything in between, it is unsurprising that it attracts controversy. This briefing provides accessible introductions to some of the key techniques that come under the AI banner, grouped into three sections to give a sense the chronology of its development. The first describes early techniques, described as 'symbolic AI' while the second focuses on the 'data driven' approaches that currently dominate, and the third looks towards possible future developments. By explaining what is 'deep' about deep learning and showing that AI is more maths than magic, the briefing aims to equip the reader with the understanding they need to engage in clear-headed reflection about AI's opportunities and challenges, a topic that is discussed in the companion briefing, Why artificial intelligence matters. First wave: Symbolic artificial intelligence Expert systems In these systems, a human expert creates precise rules that a computer can follow, step by step, to decide how to respond to a given situation. The rules are often expressed in an 'if-then-else' format. Symbolic AI can be said to 'keep the human in the loop' because the decision-making process is closely aligned to how human experts make decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Computation: a Road
    918 Biological Computation: A Road to Complex Engineered Systems Nelson Alfonso Gómez-Cruz Modeling and Simulation Laboratory Universidad del Rosario Bogotá, Colombia [email protected] Carlos Eduardo Maldonado Research Professor Universidad del Rosario Bogotá, Colombia [email protected] Provided that there is no theoretical frame for complex engineered systems (CES) as yet, this paper claims that bio-inspired engineering can help provide such a frame. Within CES bio- inspired systems play a key role. The disclosure from bio-inspired systems and biological computation has not been sufficiently worked out, however. Biological computation is to be taken as the processing of information by living systems that is carried out in polynomial time, i.e., efficiently; such processing however is grasped by current science and research as an intractable problem (for instance, the protein folding problem). A remark is needed here: P versus NP problems should be well defined and delimited but biological computation problems are not. The shift from conventional engineering to bio-inspired engineering needs bring the subject (or problem) of computability to a new level. Within the frame of computation, so far, the prevailing paradigm is still the Turing-Church thesis. In other words, conventional 919 engineering is still ruled by the Church-Turing thesis (CTt). However, CES is ruled by CTt, too. Contrarily to the above, we shall argue here that biological computation demands a more careful thinking that leads us towards hypercomputation. Bio-inspired engineering and CES thereafter, must turn its regard toward biological computation. Thus, biological computation can and should be taken as the ground for engineering complex non-linear systems.
    [Show full text]
  • What Was Life? Answers from Three Limit Biologies Author(S): Stefan Helmreich Source: Critical Inquiry, Vol
    What Was Life? Answers from Three Limit Biologies Author(s): Stefan Helmreich Source: Critical Inquiry, Vol. 37, No. 4 (Summer 2011), pp. 671-696 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/660987 . Accessed: 25/08/2011 13:15 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Critical Inquiry. http://www.jstor.org What Was Life? Answers from Three Limit Biologies Stefan Helmreich “What was life? No one knew.” —THOMAS MANN, The Magic Mountain What is life? A gathering consensus in anthropology, science studies, and philosophy of biology suggests that the theoretical object of biology, “life,” is today in transformation, if not dissolution. Proliferating repro- ductive technologies, along with genomic reshufflings of biomatter in such practices as cloning, have unwound the facts of life.1 Biotechnology, bio- This paper grew from a presentation at “Vitalism Revisited: History, Philosophy, Biology,” at the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Science and Cultural Theory, Duke University, 22 Mar. 2008. I thank Barbara Herrnstein Smith for inviting me. The paper went through revision for “Extreme: Histories and Economies of Humanness Inside Outerspaces,” at the American Anthropological Association meeting, 2–6 Dec.
    [Show full text]
  • Network Complexity of Foodwebs
    Network Complexity of Foodwebs Russell Standish School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of New South Wales Abstract Complexity as Information The notion of using information content as a complexity In previous work, I have developed an information theoretic measure is fairly simple. In most cases, there is an ob- complexity measure of networks. When applied to several vious prefix-free representation language within which de- real world food webs, there is a distinct difference in com- plexity between the real food web, and randomised control scriptions of the objects of interest can be encoded. There networks obtained by shuffling the network links. One hy- is also a classifier of descriptions that can determine if two pothesis is that this complexity surplus represents informa- descriptions correspond to the same object. This classifier is tion captured by the evolutionary process that generated the commonly called the observer, denoted O(x). network. To compute the complexity of some object x, count the In this paper, I test this idea by applying the same complex- number of equivalent descriptions ω(ℓ, x) of length ℓ that ity measure to several well-known artificial life models that map to the object x under the agreed classifier. Then the exhibit ecological networks: Tierra, EcoLab and Webworld. Contrary to what was found in real networks, the artificial life complexity of x is given in the limit as ℓ → ∞: generated foodwebs had little information difference between C(x) = lim ℓ log N − log ω(ℓ, x) (1) itself and randomly shuffled versions. ℓ→∞ where N is the size of the alphabet used for the representa- Introduction tion language.
    [Show full text]
  • Artificial Intelligence in Computer Graphics: a Constructionist Approach
    Artificial Intelligence in Computer Graphics: A Constructionist Approach Kristinn R.Thórisson,Christopher ology aims to help coordinate the effort. approach to building AI systems. The Pennock,Thor List,John DiPirro There is also a lack of incremental accumula- Constructionist AI Methodology (CAIM) is an Communicative Machines tion of knowledge in AI and related computer emerging set of principles for designing and graphics. By supporting reuse of prior work implementing interactive intelligences, Introduction we enable the building of increasingly speeding up implementation of relatively The ultimate embodiment of artificial intelli- powerful systems, as core system elements complex, multi-functional systems with full, gence (AI) has traditionally been seen as do not need to be built from scratch. real-time perception-action loop capabilities. physical robots. However, hardware is expen- Background and Motivation It helps novices as well as experts with the sive to construct and difficult to modify. The The creation of believable, interactive charac- creation of embodied, virtual agents that can connection between graphics and AI is ters is a challenge familiar to many game perceive and act in real time and interact with becoming increasingly strong, and, on the one developers. Systems that have to respond to virtual as well as real environments. The hand, it is now clear that AI research can asynchronous inputs in real time, where the embodiment of such humanoids can come in benefit tremendously from embodiment in inputs’ timing is largely unpredictable, can various levels of completeness, from just a virtual worlds [1, 4, 5]. On the other hand, pose a serious challenge to the system design.
    [Show full text]