comments

AI programs are brittle

Symbolic AI programs use rigid rules & data structures and can't adapt to fluidly to changing environments & ambiguous circumstances. Symbol structures are brittle—they break apart under the pressure of a novel or ambiguous situation.

Note: Versions of this claim are widely discussed in the literature and on these maps. For example, brittleness is discussed by Hofstadter (see "The front-end assumption is dubious", Map 1, Box 74), Brooks (see sidebar, "Postulates of subsumption architecture", on this map), Dreyfus (see sidebar "Postulates of Dreideggereanism" on this map), and the connectionists (see Map 5). It is also raised in the context of fuzzy logic.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
⌅
Artificial Intelligence
⌃
Can computers think? [1]
⌃
Yes: physical symbol systems can think [3]
■
AI programs are brittle
□
Thermostats can have beliefs
□
Humans learn by adding symbolic data to knowledge base
□
SOAR (an implemented model)
□
The Biological Assumption
□
The Disembodied Mind Assumption
□
The Heuristic Search Assumption
□
The Knowledge Base Assumption
□
The language of thought
□
The Representationalist Assumption
□
The Rule-Following Assumption
□
The Symbolic Data Assumption
□
The Universal Conceptual Framework Assumption
□
The Chinese Room Argument [4]
□
The critique of artificial reason
□
The Lighthill Report
□
Symbol systems can't think dialectically
□
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip