Roman
Roman

Reputation: 131228

Are limitations of CPU speed and memory prevent us from creating AI systems?

Many technology optimists say that in 15 years the speed of computers will be comparable with the speed of the human brain. This is why they believe that computers will achieve the same level of intelligence as humans.

If Moore's law holds, then every 18 months we should expect doubling of CPU speed. 15 years is 180 months. So, we will have the doubling 10 times. Which means that in 15 years computer will be 1024 times faster than they are now.

But is the speed the reason of the problem? If it is so, we would be able to build an AI system NOW, it would just 1024 times slower than in 15 years. Which means that to answer a question it will need 1024 second (17 minutes) instead of acceptable 1 second. But do we have now strong (but slow) AI system? I think no. Even if now (2015) we give to a system 1 hour instead of 17 minutes, or 1 day, or 1 month or even 1 year, it still will be unable to answer complex questions formulated in natural language. So, it is not the speed that causes problems.

It means that in 15 years our intelligence will not be 1024 faster than now (because we have no intelligence). Instead our "stupidity" will be 1024 times faster than now.

Upvotes: 4

Views: 560

Answers (3)

Maciej
Maciej

Reputation: 9605

We need both faster hardware and better algorithms. Of course speed alone is not enough as you pointed out. We need self-modifying meta-learning algorithms capable of creating hypotheses and performing experiments to verify them (like humans do). Systems that are learning to learn and self-improving. Algorithms that can prove that given self-modification is optimal in certain sense and will lead to even better self-modifications in the future. Systems that can reflect on and inspect their own software (can you call it consciousness ?). Such research is being done and may create superhuman intelligence in the future or even technological singularity as some believe.

There is one problem with this approach, though. People doing this research usually assume that consciousness is computable. That it is all about intelligence. They don't take into account experiences like pleasure and pain which have nothing to do (in my opinion) with computation nor intellect. You can understand pain through experience only (not intellectual speculation). Setting variable pleasure to 5 or behaving like one feels pleasure is very different from experiencing pleasure. Some people say that feelings originate in brain so it is enough to understand brain. Not necessarily. Child can ask: "How did they put small people inside TV box ?". Of course TV is just a receiver and there are no small people inside. Brain might be receiver too. Do we need higher knowledge for feelings and other experiences ?

Upvotes: 5

Dietrich George
Dietrich George

Reputation: 114

I would say no. As you showed, speed is not the only factor of intelligence. I for one would think Language is, yes language. Language is the primary skill we learn as humans, so why not for computers? Language gives an understanding that can be understood across the globe, given you know that language. Humans use nonverbal and verbal language to communicate. But I honestly think it really works something like this:

Humans go through experiences. These experiences have a bigger impact on our lives the closer we are to our birth date, or the more emotional they are. For example, the first time we are told no means ALOT more to us as an infant than as a 70 year old adult. These get stored as either long term or short term memory and correlated to that event later on in life for reference. We mainly store events to learn from them to prevent negative experience or promote positive experiences.

Think of it as a tag cloud. The more often you do task A, the bigger the cloud is in memory. We then store crucial details such as type of emotion, location, smells etc. Now when we reference them again from memory we pick out those details and create a logical sentence:

Touching that stove hurt me when I was at grandma's house.

All of the bolded words would have to be stored to have a complete memory.

Now inside of this sentence we have learned a lot more things than just being hurt from the stove at grandma's house. We have learned that stove's can be hot, dangerous, and grandma allows it to be in her house. We also learned how long it takes to heal from such an event, emotionally and physically to gauge how important the event is. And so much more. So we also store this sub-event information inside of other knowledge bubbles. And these bubbles continue to grow exponentially.

Now when asked: Are stoves dangerous?

You can identify the words in the sentence:

are, stoves, dangerous, question

and reference the definition of dangerous as: hurt, bad

and then provide more evidence that this is true, such as personal experience to result in:

Yes, stoves are dangerous because I was hurt at grandmas house by one.

So intelligence seems to be a mix of events, correlation and data retrieval to solve some solution. I'm sure there's a lot more to it than that but this is just my understanding of intelligence.

Upvotes: 0

kidra.pazzo
kidra.pazzo

Reputation: 195

The answer has to be answered in the context of computation and complexity. Every algorithm has its own complexity and running time (See Big O notation). There are problems which are non-computable problems such as the halting problem. These problems are proven that an algorithm does not exists independent of the hardware. Computable algorithms are described in the number of steps required with respect to the input to solve an algorithm. As the number of input increases, the execution time of the algorithm also increases. However, these algorithms can be categorized into two: exponential time algorithms and non-exponential time algorithms. Exponential time algorithms increases drastically with the number of input and becomes intractable. These executing time of these problems can be improved with better hardware however the complexity will always be the same. This means that no matter what the CPU uses, the execution time will always require the same number of steps. This means that the hardware is important to provide an answer in less time but the hardness of the problem will always remain the same. Thus, the limitation of the hardware is not preventing us from creating an AI system. For instance, you can use parallel programming (ex: GPU) to improve the execution time of the algorithm drastically but the algorithm is still the same as a normal CPU algorithm.

Upvotes: 0

Related Questions