Main points chapter 2

1
Main points chapter 2

• (from class discussions)
• 1a Complex animal behaviour can be applied to
  robots
• 1b Robots are procedural, no prior considerations
  of its own behaviour, no decision making, no
  reliance on psychology.
• 2a. Must be able to prioritise without getting
  into unrecoverable debt.
• 2b. Efficiency must be considered, there is a
  tradeoff between energy refuelling and time spent
  working.

2
Chapter 3 (from class discussions)

• 1a The mind is a black box it is difficult to
  unambigously determine its state based on its
  behaviour alone.
• 1b There are many interpretations of animal
  behaviour, but we can never be sure what animals
  actually think
• 2a The three intentional stances design,
  physical, intentional can be interpreted in
  different ways (degrees)
• 2b Considering that a dog may have (dog-like)
  beliefs is not the same as anthropomorphising.

3
Abstract

• - should summarise the content of your assignment
  as a whole.
• Good example
• This paper is a criticism of Darwins mistake
  Explaining the discontinuity between human and
  non-human minds. By discussing evidence omitted
  from the paper and new evidence collected I hope
  to put forward the idea that this paper needs to
  be taken with a pinch of salt and should not be
  accepted without great thought. Apart from the
  evidence provided I include various references to
  the open peer community which responded heavily
  to this paper. Also a quick review of the
  layout, wording and originality of the paper is
  included in this criticism.

4
Introduction

• Say what youre going to say
• Good example says whats going to be said, but
  also catches the readers interest
• When an article is released, claiming that one of
  the greatest scientific minds of all time was
  mistaken, it is likely to be met with scepticism.
  Its entirely possible than an even greater
  genius has come along to free us from ignorance,
  but 99 times out of 100 itll just be a way to
  get noticed. In the following analysis of Penn
  et als Darwins mistake Explaining the
  discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds,
  I attempt to determine whether the theories put
  forward by this potential genius are worthy of
  the attention sought by their title.

5
Organisation

• Good introduction and conclusion
• Coherence building up an argument,
• Part of this is remembering (and referring back)
  to what you said earlier.

6
Conclusion

• Reflect back on what you have said
• Good example
• Overall, it appears that Penn et al are
  presenting a paper which they consider to be
  controversial without fully considering the
  arguments and conclusion they have put forward.
  Their paper presents itself (as) a fast paced
  review of research in the field without going
  into depth into any particular area and also
  rushes its conclusion. I believe that the
  authors could have presented a much more
  convincing paper if they had instead focused on
  one or two of the eight areas of cognition they
  address. The authors do little to introduce
  their paper in terms of its aims and little to
  conclude it, making the paper appear as little
  more than a reinterpretation of past research
  which attempts to distinguish itself by
  presenting the information under a
  controversial subtext. Perhaps Penn et als
  hast and conclusion that a lack of evidence shows
  that there is evidence of an absence is best
  summed by McGonigle and Chalmers (2008) in their
  criticism when they say that the discontinuity
  as well as continuity in the (nonlinear)
  evolution of cognitive systems is hardly news
  and that In an exciting area still largely in a
  vacuum created more by experimental neglect
  rather than animal failures, this rush to
  judgement by Penn et al will put this fragile yet
  exciting new comparative agenda at risk.

7

• Cited in
• Reference schemes
• number in text then each number is a reference
  at the end
• (organised alphabetically, or in order they
  occur in text).
• Or name and date in text, and then full
  references provided at the end

8
Physical Symbol System Hypothesis

• A physical symbol system is a necessary and
  sufficient condition for an intelligent system
• Newell and Simon 1975
• Core concept in Artificial Intelligence
• A physical symbol system "consists of a set of
  entities, called symbols, which are physical
  patterns that can occur as components of another
  type of entity called an expression (or symbol
  structure). Thus, a symbol structure is composed
  of a number of instances (or tokens) of symbols
  related in some physical way (such as one token
  being next to another). At any instant of time
  the system will contain a collection of these
  symbol structures. Besides these structures, the
  system also contains a collection of processes
  that operate on expressions to produce other
  expressions processes of creation, modification,
  reproduction and destruction. A physical symbol
  system is a machine that produces through time an
  evolving collection of symbol structures. Such a
  system exists in a world of objects wider than
  just these symbolic expressions themselves."

9

• A physical symbol system takes physical patterns
  (symbols) combining them, and manipulating them
  to form new expressions.
• Claim implies human thought is symbol processing,
  and also that machines can be intelligent
  (because they can manipulate symbols).

10

• Criticisms include
• Dreyfus, and knowledge like riding a bicycle that
  cant be captured in rules and symbols
• Searle and Chinese room symbols need to be
  grounded in the real world to have meaning
• Brooks and the world is its own best model, and
  focus on abilities of simpler organisms and
  robots that can move and survive without symbols.