TEXT B In the 1950s, the pioneers
of artificial intelligence (AI) predicted that, by the end of this century,
computers would be conversing with us at work and robots would be performing our
housework. But as useful as computers are, they’re nowhere close to achieving
anything remotely resembling these early aspirations for humanlike behavior.
Never mind something as complex as conversation: the most powerful
computers struggle to reliably recognize the shape of an object, the most
elementary of tasks for a ten-month-old kid. A growing group of
AI researchers think they know where the field went wrong. The problem, the
scientists say, is that AI has been trying to separate the highest, most
abstract levels of thought, like language and mathematics, and to duplicate them
with logical, step-by-step programs. A new movement in Al, on the other hand,
takes a closer look at the more roundabout way in which nature came up with
intelligence. Many of these researchers study evolution and natural adaptation
instead of formal logic and conventional computer programs. Rather than digital
computers and transistors, some want to work with brain cells and proteins. The
re- suits of these early efforts are as promising as they are peculiar, and the
new nature-based AI movement is slowly but surely moving to the fore- front of
the field. Imitating the brain’s neural network is a huge step
in the right direction, says computer scientist and biophysicist Michael Conrad,
but it still misses an important aspect of natural intelligence. "People tend to
treat the brain as if it were made up of color-coded transistors", he
explains, "but it’s not simply a clever network of switches. There are lots
of important things going on inside the brain cells themselves." Specifically,
Conrad believes that many of the brain’s capabilities stem from the pat-
tern-recognition proficiency of the individual molecules that make up each brain
cell. The best way to build and artificially intelligent device, he claims,
would be to build it around the same sort of molecular skills.
Right now, the notion that conventional computers and software are
fundamentally incapable of matching the processes that take place in the brain
remains controversial. But if it pr. yes true, then the efforts of Conrad and
his fellow Al rebels could turn out to be the only game in town. What’s the author’s opinion about the new Al movement
A.It has created a sensation among artificial intelligence researchers but will soon die out. B.It’s a breakthrough in duplicating human thought processes. C.It’s more like a peculiar game rather than a real scientific effort. D.It may prove to be in the right direction though nobody is sure of its future prospects.