Taking the fifth amendment in Turing’s imitation game

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)
48 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In this paper, we look at a specific issue with practical Turing tests, namely the right of the machine to remain silent during interrogation. In particular, we consider the possibility of a machine passing the Turing test simply by not saying anything. We include a number of transcripts from practical Turing tests in which silence has actually occurred on the part of a hidden entity. Each of the transcripts considered here resulted in a judge being unable to make the ‘right identification’, i.e., they could not say for certain which hidden entity was the machine. Publisher statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence on 7th January 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)287-297
JournalJournal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence
Volume29
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Jan 2016

Fingerprint

Imitation
Turing
Artificial intelligence
Game
Artificial Intelligence

Bibliographical note

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence on 7th January 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273

Keywords

  • Deception detection
  • natural language
  • Turing’s imitation game
  • chatbots
  • machine misidentification

Cite this

@article{ff1c8b03db034ad99865ffae4bb3ed11,
title = "Taking the fifth amendment in Turing’s imitation game",
abstract = "In this paper, we look at a specific issue with practical Turing tests, namely the right of the machine to remain silent during interrogation. In particular, we consider the possibility of a machine passing the Turing test simply by not saying anything. We include a number of transcripts from practical Turing tests in which silence has actually occurred on the part of a hidden entity. Each of the transcripts considered here resulted in a judge being unable to make the ‘right identification’, i.e., they could not say for certain which hidden entity was the machine. Publisher statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence on 7th January 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273",
keywords = "Deception detection, natural language, Turing’s imitation game, chatbots, machine misidentification",
author = "Kevin Warwick and Huma Shah",
note = "This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence on 7th January 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "287--297",
journal = "Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence",
issn = "0952-813X",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Taking the fifth amendment in Turing’s imitation game

AU - Warwick, Kevin

AU - Shah, Huma

N1 - This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence on 7th January 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273

PY - 2016/1/7

Y1 - 2016/1/7

N2 - In this paper, we look at a specific issue with practical Turing tests, namely the right of the machine to remain silent during interrogation. In particular, we consider the possibility of a machine passing the Turing test simply by not saying anything. We include a number of transcripts from practical Turing tests in which silence has actually occurred on the part of a hidden entity. Each of the transcripts considered here resulted in a judge being unable to make the ‘right identification’, i.e., they could not say for certain which hidden entity was the machine. Publisher statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence on 7th January 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273

AB - In this paper, we look at a specific issue with practical Turing tests, namely the right of the machine to remain silent during interrogation. In particular, we consider the possibility of a machine passing the Turing test simply by not saying anything. We include a number of transcripts from practical Turing tests in which silence has actually occurred on the part of a hidden entity. Each of the transcripts considered here resulted in a judge being unable to make the ‘right identification’, i.e., they could not say for certain which hidden entity was the machine. Publisher statement: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence on 7th January 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273

KW - Deception detection

KW - natural language

KW - Turing’s imitation game

KW - chatbots

KW - machine misidentification

U2 - 10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273

DO - 10.1080/0952813X.2015.1132273

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 287

EP - 297

JO - Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence

JF - Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence

SN - 0952-813X

ER -