Predicting the development of artificial intelligence (AI) is a difficult project – but a vital one, according to some analysts. AI predictions are already abound: but are they reliable? This paper starts by proposing a decomposition schema for classifying them. Then it constructs
a variety of theoretical tools for analysing, judging and improving them. These tools are demonstrated by careful analysis of five famous AI predictions: the initial Dartmouth conference, Dreyfus's criticism of AI, Searle's Chinese room paper, Kurzweil's predictions in the Age of Spiritual
Machines, and Omohundro's ‘AI drives’ paper. These case studies illustrate several important principles, such as the general overconfidence of experts, the superiority of models over expert judgement and the need for greater uncertainty in all types of predictions. The general
reliability of expert judgement in AI timeline predictions is shown to be poor, a result that fits in with previous studies of expert competence.
No Reference information available - sign in for access.
No Citation information available - sign in for access.
No Supplementary Data.
No Article Media
Document Type: Research Article
The Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford, Suite 8, Littlegate House, 16/17 St Ebbe's Street, Oxford, OX1 1PT, UK
Machine Intelligence Research Institute, 2721 Shattuck Avenue #1023, Berkeley, CA, 94705, USA
Publication date: July 3, 2014
More about this publication?