4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Computing machinery and creativity: lessons learned from the Turing test

      ,
      Kybernetes
      Emerald

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relevance and the appropriateness of Turing-style tests for computational creativity.

          Design/methodology/approach

          – The Turing test is both a milestone and a stumbling block in artificial intelligence (AI). For more than half a century, the “grand goal of passing the test” has taught the authors many lessons. Here, the authors analyze the relevance of these lessons for computational creativity.

          Findings

          – Like the burgeoning AI, computational creativity concerns itself with fundamental questions such as “Can machines be creative?” It is indeed possible to frame such questions as empirical, Turing-style tests. However, such tests entail a number of intricate and possibly unsolvable problems, which might easily lead the authors into old and new blind alleys. The authors propose an outline of an alternative testing procedure that is fundamentally different from Turing-style tests. This new procedure focuses on the unfolding of creativity over time, and – unlike Turing-style tests – it is amenable to a more meaningful statistical testing.

          Research limitations/implications

          – This paper argues against Turing-style tests for computational creativity.

          Practical implications

          – This paper opens a new avenue for viable and more meaningful testing procedures.

          Originality/value

          – The novel contributions are: an analysis of seven lessons from the Turing test for computational creativity; an argumentation against Turing-style tests; and a proposal of a new testing procedure.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          I.—COMPUTING MACHINERY AND INTELLIGENCE

          A Turing (1950)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Computer Models of Creativity

            Creativity isn’t magical. It’s an aspect of normal human intelligence, not a special faculty granted to a tiny elite. There are three forms: combinational, exploratory, and transformational. All three can be modeled by AI—in some cases, with impressive results. AI techniques underlie various types of computer art. Whether computers could “really” be creative isn’t a scientific question but a philosophical one, to which there’s no clear answer. But we do have the beginnings of a scientific understanding of creativity.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The imitation game--a computational chemical approach to recognizing life.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Kybernetes
                Emerald
                0368-492X
                January 28 2014
                January 28 2014
                January 28 2014
                January 28 2014
                : 43
                : 1
                : 82-91
                Article
                10.1108/K-08-2013-0175
                a25d06a6-0fb4-419b-92c5-93e8ab5f4827
                © 2014

                https://www.emerald.com/insight/site-policies

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article