<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
now, with the model below - i have to make a couple statements: it is
Extremely rough - no assumption is made about correctness nor
completeness. so i would prefer readers send suggestions about
component corrections or extensions - not simply dismissal like regan
seems to prefer. regan would seem to prefer to reject point by point -
just to dismiss my ideas - without reading or understanding. perhaps it
is their job to confuse and obfuscate - so i would take any of their
statements with a large "grain" of salt; don't just take regan's word
for it - <b>read for yourself and decide for yourself</b>. the other
point about the model is that there is no assumption made that it is
anything similar to human consciousness - i am NOT saying this is how
we think or are aware. it is only a guess. it is only a model of the
guess. so plz don't assume i am saying "this is a complete and accurate
model of human consciousness" - it is NOT.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p class="MsoNormal">A COnscious MAchine Simulator – <st1:place
w:st="on">ACOMAS</st1:place></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Salvatore Gerard Micheal, <b>modified</b>
15/JAN/09</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Objects</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>2 cross verifying
senses (simulated)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>hearing (stereo)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>seeing (stereo)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span><b>motivation
subsystem (specs to be determined)<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style=""> </span>information
filters (4 controlled hierarchically)<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span><b>supervisory
symbol register (same as below)<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>short-term<b>/primary</b>
symbol register (8^3 symbols arranged in 8x8x8 array)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>rule-base (self
verifying and extending)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span><b>rule-base symbol
register (same as above)<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>3D visualization
register
<b>(10^12 bits arranged in 10000x10000x10000 array)</b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>models of reality
(at least 2)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>morality
(unmodifiable and uncircumventable)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>don’t steal,
kill, lie, or harm</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>goal list
(modifiable, prioritized)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>output devices</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>robotic arms
(simulated
– 2)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="">
</span>voice-synthesizer and speaker</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>video display
unit</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>local environment
(simulated)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>operator
(simulated, controlled by operator)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Purpose</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>test feasibility of
construct for an actual conscious machine</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>discover timing
requirements for working prototype</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>discover
specifications of objects</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>discover
implications/consequences of enhanced intelligence</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>(humans have 7
short-term symbol registers)</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>discover
implications/consequences of emotionless consciousness</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Specifications – The registers are the core of the
device –
the (qualified) ‘controllers’ of the system (acting on goal list), the
reasoners of the system (identifying rules), but all constrained by
morality.
The goal list should be instantaneously modifiable. For instance, an
operator
can request “show me your goal list” .. “delete that item” or “move
that item
to the top” .. “learn the rules of chess” and the device should comply
immediately. Otherwise, the device plays with its environment –
learning new
rules and proposing new experiments.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The purpose of the cross verifying senses is to
reinforce
the ‘sense of identity’ established by these, registers, and model of
reality.
The reason for ‘at least 2’ models is to provide a ‘means-ends’ basis
for
problem solving – one model to represent local environment ‘as is’ and
another
for the desired outcome of the top goal. The purpose for arranging the
short-term register in a 3D array is to give the capacity for ‘novel
thought’
processes (humans have a tendency to think in linear sequential terms).
The
reason for designing a self verifying and extending rule-base is
because that
has a tendency to be a data and processing intensive activity – if we
designed
the primary task of the device to be a ‘rule-base analyzer’,
undoubtedly the
device would spend the bulk of its time on related tasks (thereby
creating a
rule-base analyzer device and not a conscious machine). The ‘models of
reality’
could be as simple as a list of objects and locations. Or, they could
be a
virtual reality implemented on a dedicated machine. This applies to the
‘local
environment’ as well. For operator convenience, the simulated local
environment
should be in the form of a virtual reality. So the operator would
interact with
the device in a virtual world (in the simulated version). In this
version, the
senses, robot arms, and operator presence – would all be virtual. This
should
be clarified to the device so that any transition to ‘real reality’
would not
have destructive consequences.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Modifications: the specs for the visualization
register
at this time were “either or” – either a restricted VR (as described in
the
specs-01 document) or a bit-array. Since I’m not a VR programmer, it
was
simpler for me to specify my “best guess” at the requirements for a
bit-array.
A dedicated rule-base symbol register was added because that subsystem
will
likely be “register hogging” and won’t allow the device to freely “pay
attention” to anything else but rule-base development. The supervisory
symbol
register was added also to “free up” the primary symbol register for
“attentive
tasks”. The purpose of that is exactly what it says: to take directives
directly from the motivation subsystem and “tell” the rest of the
system what
to do. For instance, the rule-base register may be currently scanning
the
rule-base for consistency (since there were no immediate tasks
assigned). The
primary symbol register is telling the robotic arms to push a set of
toy blocks
over (since it is in play/experiment mode – to see what happens). The
supervisory symbol register just received a directive from motivation:
try to
make Sam laugh with a joke. A possible scenario is described in
specs-01. (The
directive would have to entail “researching” what a joke is – in the
rule-base,
what qualifies as “laughing”, and any other definitions required to
satisfy the
directive. If those researches were not satisfied, the directive would
have to
be discarded or questions asked of the operator: “Sam, what’s a joke?”)
..After
outlining the ‘conscious part’ in a schematic ‘block diagram’, I
realized
information filters would be required implemented in a hierarchical
fashion
(this basic design was approached in ’95). Senses feed: motivation,
supervisor,
primary register, and visualization register. But through filters:
motivation controls
its own and the supervisor filter; supervisor controls the filters
feeding the
registers. Directives/info flows directly from: motivation to
supervisor and
supervisor to registers. Signals before and after filters would be
analogous to
sensations and perceptions: the hierarchical ‘filter control structure’
decides
what sensations are perceived by lower registers – thereby controlling
sensation impact and actual register content. Whether or not humans
actually
think like this, I believe the structure is rich enough to at least
mimic human
consciousness. The crux, ‘the Achilles Heel’, becomes motivation. The
motivation subsystem must be flexible and focusable. It cannot be
overly
flexible (completely random) or overly rigid (focusing only on the goal
list).
Its control of the filters (including its own) must be adaptable and
expedient.
Its purpose is to guide the system away from inane repetition, ‘blind
alleys’
(unnavigable logical sequences and unprovable physics), and
catastrophic
failure; simultaneously, guide the system toward robust and reliable
solutions
to problems, expedient play/experimentation, and engaging conversation
with the
operator. If this sounds impossible, try to raise a baby without any
experience! You learn fast! ;)<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">My ultimate purpose of creating a conscious
machine is not
out of ego or self aggrandizement. I simply want to see if it can be
done. If
it can be done, then create something creative with potential. My
mother argues
a robot can never ‘procreate’ because they are not ‘flesh and blood’.
It can
never have insight or other elusive human qualities. I argue that they
can
‘procreate’ in their own way and are only limited by their creators. If
we can
‘distill’ the essence of consciousness in a construct (like above), if
we can implement
it on a set of computer hardware and software, if we give that
construct the
capacity for growth, if that construct has even a minimal creative
ability
(such as with GA/GP), and critically limit its behavior by morality
(such as
above), we have created a sentient being (not just an
artificial/synthetic
consciousness). I focus on morality because if such a device became
widespread,
undoubtedly they would be abused to perform ‘unsavory’ tasks which
would have
fatal legal consequences for inventor and producer alike.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In this context, I propose we establish ‘robot
rights’
before they are developed in order to provide a framework for dealing
with
abuses and ‘violations of law’. Now, all this may seem like science
fiction to most.
But I contend we have focused far too long on what we call ‘AI’ and
expert
systems. For too long we have blocked real progress in machine
intelligence by
one of two things: mystifying ‘the human animal’ (by basically saying
it can’t
be done) – or – staring at an inappropriate paradigm. It’s good to
understand
linguistics and vision – without that understanding, perhaps we could
not
implement certain portions of the construct above. But unless we focus
on the
mechanisms of consciousness, we will never model it, simulate it, or
create it
artificially.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</body>
</html>