اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدMeta-learning in natural and artificial intelligence
186
0
0.0
(
0
)
تأليف
Jane X. Wang
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Meta-learning, or learning to learn, has gained renewed interest in recent years within the artificial intelligence community. However, meta-learning is incredibly prevalent within nature, has deep roots in cognitive science and psychology, and is currently studied in various forms within neuroscience. The aim of this review is to recast previous lines of research in the study of biological intelligence within the lens of meta-learning, placing these works into a common framework. More recent points of interaction between AI and neuroscience will be discussed, as well as interesting new directions that arise under this perspective.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
This article reviews the Once learning mechanism that was proposed 23 years ago and the subsequent successes of One-shot learning in image classification and You Only Look Once - YOLO in objective detection. Analyzing the current development of Artif
icial Intelligence (AI), the proposal is that AI should be clearly divided into the following categories: Artificial Human Intelligence (AHI), Artificial Machine Intelligence (AMI), and Artificial Biological Intelligence (ABI), which will also be the main directions of theory and application development for AI. As a watershed for the branches of AI, some classification standards and methods are discussed: 1) Human-oriented, machine-oriented, and biological-oriented AI R&D; 2) Information input processed by Dimensionality-up or Dimensionality-reduction; 3) The use of one/few or large samples for knowledge learning.
The ability to use symbols is the pinnacle of human intelligence, but has yet to be fully replicated in machines. Here we argue that the path towards symbolically fluent artificial intelligence (AI) begins with a reinterpretation of what symbols are,
how they come to exist, and how a system behaves when it uses them. We begin by offering an interpretation of symbols as entities whose meaning is established by convention. But crucially, something is a symbol only for those who demonstrably and actively participate in this convention. We then outline how this interpretation thematically unifies the behavioural traits humans exhibit when they use symbols. This motivates our proposal that the field place a greater emphasis on symbolic behaviour rather than particular computational mechanisms inspired by more restrictive interpretations of symbols. Finally, we suggest that AI research explore social and cultural engagement as a tool to develop the cognitive machinery necessary for symbolic behaviour to emerge. This approach will allow for AI to interpret something as symbolic on its own rather than simply manipulate things that are only symbols to human onlookers, and thus will ultimately lead to AI with more human-like symbolic fluency.
As artificial intelligence (AI) systems become increasingly ubiquitous, the topic of AI governance for ethical decision-making by AI has captured public imagination. Within the AI research community, this topic remains less familiar to many researche
rs. In this paper, we complement existing surveys, which largely focused on the psychological, social and legal discussions of the topic, with an analysis of recent advances in technical solutions for AI governance. By reviewing publications in leading AI conferences including AAAI, AAMAS, ECAI and IJCAI, we propose a taxonomy which divides the field into four areas: 1) exploring ethical dilemmas; 2) individual ethical decision frameworks; 3) collective ethical decision frameworks; and 4) ethics in human-AI interactions. We highlight the intuitions and key techniques used in each approach, and discuss promising future research directions towards successful integration of ethical AI systems into human societies.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly becoming integrated into military Command and Control (C2) systems as a strategic priority for many defence forces. The successful implementation of AI is promising to herald a significant leap in C2 agility th
rough automation. However, realistic expectations need to be set on what AI can achieve in the foreseeable future. This paper will argue that AI could lead to a fragility trap, whereby the delegation of C2 functions to an AI could increase the fragility of C2, resulting in catastrophic strategic failures. This calls for a new framework for AI in C2 to avoid this trap. We will argue that antifragility along with agility should form the core design principles for AI-enabled C2 systems. This duality is termed Agile, Antifragile, AI-Enabled Command and Control (A3IC2). An A3IC2 system continuously improves its capacity to perform in the face of shocks and surprises through overcompensation from feedback during the C2 decision-making cycle. An A3IC2 system will not only be able to survive within a complex operational environment, it will also thrive, benefiting from the inevitable shocks and volatility of war.
In this paper we discuss how systems with Artificial Intelligence (AI) can undergo safety assessment. This is relevant, if AI is used in safety related applications. Taking a deeper look into AI models, we show, that many models of artificial intelli
gence, in particular machine learning, are statistical models. Safety assessment would then have t o concentrate on the model that is used in AI, besides the normal assessment procedure. Part of the budget of dangerous random failures for the relevant safety integrity level needs to be used for the probabilistic faulty behavior of the AI system. We demonstrate our thoughts with a simple example and propose a research challenge that may be decisive for the use of AI in safety related systems.
الأسئلة المقترحة
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
