1 Aibot

CHATBOT:Hello,my name is Chatbot.What's youer name?
you:my name is guohua
CHATBOT:ok I will call you guohua
you:how old are you
CHATBOT:I'm Enghteen in computer your
you:Where do your live
CHATBOT:ALL over the world.
you:Would you mind if i smoked?
CHATBOT:no i don't mind
you: like to join me for coffee?
CHATBOT:Hmm,guohua, I'm not sure if I'd like to join you for coffee that much.
I like to collect gossip
you:I wonder if there will be a stirm.
CHATBOT:You are curious about if there will be a stirm
you:yes
CHATBOT:I understand.
you:What are the most popular movies now showing?
CHATBOT:I have to search the web for that information.I would do a search for it.
you:What time is the next showing?
CHATBOT:Time dose not exist.
you:Are there any good jogging trails.
CHATBOT:No Idon't think there are any.
you:Where can I shoot some baskets?
CHATBOT:Wherever you are right now.
you:Can you recommend a good restaurant nearby?
CHATBOT:Have you tried looking in the open directary? would you like to know more?
you:thank
CHATBOT:Is the holding of hands a symbolic gesture for humans?
you:sorry,I am leave
CHATBOT:There's no need to apologize.Good gossip: you are leave.
you:bey bey

2

Turing Machine
By 1933 Turing had already introduced himself to Russell and Whitehead's Principia Mathematica and so to the then arcane area of mathematical logic. Bertrand Russell had thought of logic as a solid foundation for mathematical truth, but many questions had since been raised about how truth could be captured by any formalism. In particular, in 1931 Goedel had shattered Russell's picture by showing the incompleteness of mathematics: the existence of true statements about numbers which could not be proved by the formal application of set rules of deduction. In 1935, Turing learnt from the lecture course of the Cambridge topologist M. H. A. Newman that a further question, posed by Hilbert, still lay open. It was the question of Decidability, the Entscheidungsproblem. Could there exist, at least in principle, a definite method or process by which it could be decided whether any given mathematical assertion was provable? Alan Turing in 1934 
To answer such a question needed a definition of 'method' which would be not only precise but compelling. This is what Turing supplied. He analysed what could be achieved by a person performing a methodical process, and seizing on the idea of something done 'mechanically', expressed the analysis in terms of a theoretical machine able to perform certain precisely defined elementary operations on symbols on paper tape. He presented convincing arguments that the scope of such a machine was sufficient to encompass everything that would count as a 'definite method.' Daringly he included an argument based on the transitions between 'states of mind' of a human being performing a mental process. This triple correspondence between logical instructions, the action of the mind, and a machine which could in principle be embodied in a practical physical form, was Turing's definitive contribution. Having made this novel definition of what should count as a 'definite method' --- in modern language, an algorithm --- it was not too hard to answer Hilbert's question in the negative: no such decision procedure exists. In April 1936 he showed his result to Newman; but at the same moment the parallel conclusion of the American logician Alonzo Church became known, and Turing was robbed of the full reward for his originality. His paper, On Computable Numbers with an application to the Entscheidungsproblem, had to refer to Church's work, and was delayed until August 1936. However it was seen at the time that Turing's approach was original and different; Church relied upon an assumption internal to mathematics, rather than appealing to operations that could actually be done by real things or people in the physical world. Subsequently, the concept of the Turing machine has become the foundation of the modern theory of computation and computability. Turing worked in isolation from the powerful school of logical theory centred on Church at Princeton University, and his work emerged as that of a complete outsider. One can only speculate, but it looks as if Turing found in the concept of the Turing machine something that would satisfy the fascination with the problem of Mind that Christopher Morcom had sparked; his total originality lay in seeing the relevance of mathematical logic to a problem originally seen as one of physics. In this paper, as in so many aspects of his life, Turing made a bridge between the logical and the physical worlds, thought and action, which crossed conventional boundaries. His work introduced a concept of immense practical significance: the idea of the Universal Turing Machine. The concept of 'the Turing machine' is like that of 'the formula' or 'the equation'; there is an infinity of possible Turing machines, each corresponding to a different 'definite method' or algorithm. But imagine, as Turing did, each particular algorithm written out as a set of instructions in a standard form. Then the work of interpreting the instructions and carrying them out is itself a mechanical process, and so can itself be embodied in a particular Turing machine, namely the Universal Turing machine. A Universal Turing machine can be made do what any other particular Turing machine would do, by supplying it with the standard form describing that Turing machine. One machine, for all possible tasks. It is hard now not to think of a Turing machine as a computer program, and the mechanical task of interpreting and obeying the program as what the computer itself does. Thus, the Universal Turing Machine embodies the essential principle of the computer: a single machine which can be turned to any well-defined task by being supplied with the appropriate program. Additionally, the abstract Universal Turing Machine naturally exploits what was later seen as the 'stored program' concept essential to the modern computer: it embodies the crucial twentieth-century insight that symbols representing instructions are no different in kind from symbols representing numbers. But computers, in this modern sense, did not exist in 1936. Turing created these concepts out of his mathematical imagination. Only nine years later would electronic technology be tried and tested sufficiently to make it practical to transfer the logic of his ideas into actual engineering. In the meanwhile the idea lived only in his mind. In common with other outstanding young scientists, Turing spent two years at Princeton University enrolled as a graduate student. He arrived in September 1936. On Computable Numbers... was published at the very end of 1936 and attracted some attention; by the time he left, the idea had come to the attention of the leading Hungarian-American mathematician John von Neumann. But Turing certainly did not shoot to fame. He worked on on algebra and number theory; on showing that his definition of computability coincided with that of Church; and on an extension of his ideas (Ordinal Logics) which provided a Ph.D. thesis. The work on 'ordinal logics', probably his most difficult and deepest mathematical work, was an attempt to bring some kind of order to the realm of the uncomputable. This also was connected to the question of the nature of mind, as Turing's interpretation of his ideas suggested that human 'intuition' could correspond to uncomputable steps in an argument. But Turing never pursued this line of development after 1938. Instead, he was increasingly preoccupied with more immediate problems which demanded logical skills. True to the concreteness of the Turing machine, he also spent time at Princeton making a cipher machine based on using electromagnetic relays to multiply binary numbers. Even then he saw a link from 'useless' logic to practical computation. Although not one of the political intellectuals of the 1930s, Turing followed current events and was influenced in studying ciphers by the prospect of war with Germany. Copyright Andrew Hodges 1995, 1999 


3 Turing Test 
In 1950 Alan Turing published his now famous paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence." In that paper he describes a method for humans to test AI programs. In its most basic form, a human judge sits at a computer terminal and interacts with the subject by written communication only. The judge must then decide if the subject on the other end of the computer link is a human or an AI program imitating a human. 
Can Turings test be improved on? Yes. With current advances in computer graphics, virtual reality, biomechanics and many other fields, it is possible to create an "Enhanced" or "Virtual" Turing test. The underlying idea of the test is still the same, but the amount of interaction between judge and subject is increased greatly. 
How would this Virtual Turing Test work? The first step is to create a 'world' for the judge and subject to inhabit. ('World' is a Virtual Reality term that signifies a shared electronic space, or cyberspace, where everyone immersed in it has the ability to interact with everything else in the world) With current technology this may require the judge to wear a bodysuit, gloves, and eyephones. In the future, such bulky methods of entering cyberspace will be replaced by more natural and unobtrusive means, such as a direct neural interface. 
When the judge is immersed into the Virtual Turing Test world all his sensual stimulations are produced by the computer. The judge sees a three dimensional, high resolution computer graphic image of this new world from the viewpoint of his virtual twin. Inside this world the subject and various physical objects reside (let us say 2 chairs, a table, some cups, and a steaming pot of tea). The judge can sit at the chair, grab a cup and feel the texture of the cup against his hand by use of tactile response material next to his skin. The judge can change his viewpoint by getting up and walking around. If he drops the cup on the floor, it will shatter and a suitable sound will emerge from the three dimensional coordinates where the cup landed. For all extents and purposes, when he judge is immersed in the Virtual Turing Test the outside world does not exist. 
Sitting across from the judge will be the subject, a computer graphic image of a human being. The judge will not know if the subjects actions are controlled by another human or a suitably advanced computer simulation. The subject could be someone in the next room wearing the same equipment that the judge is wearing, and immersed in the same world that the judge is in. It is the judges role to test the subject and decide if it is human or not. 
If the subject is a human the computer will copy every movement the subject makes, every sound that they produce, every facial expression, every hand gesture, every eye movement. When the subject talks, the sound will originate from the mouth of the subjects virtual copy. 
If the subject is a simulation then the computer will control every aspect of the subject. The simulation must be able to speak and interact with the judge in every way that the a human subject would. If the judge reaches across the table to slap the subject in the head, the simulation will realize this and dodge out of the way, much like any human would do. The simulation will be able to interact with the virtual environment in every way that the judge can. If the judge politely asks the subject to pour them both a cup of tea, this physical interaction will be no problem for the simulation. 
The core of the simulation must control three basic items: comphrehensive communication with the judge, correct biomechanical movement, and awareness of its environment. 
The last of these items is the simplest. The computer already knows where every object is in the virtual world. It can easily calculate what 2 images would enter the simulations eyes from whatever viewpoint it happens to be at. Of course, the control program should not allow the simulation to know more then it should. If the Judge is holding a book behind his back and the simulation has not 'seen' the book yet, then, even through the control program knows where and what the book is, it will not pass this information to the simulation until the book comes into its field of view. The second item, correct biomechanical movement, deals with the way humans move. It is impossible for a normal human to bend his elbow past a certain point. The simulation will follow all the physical limitations that the human body has. It may not create a new arm or leg if needed, it may not turn it's head around 360 degrees, it may not fly into the air by flapping its arms, etc. This aspect of the simulation, while by no means trivial, can be created with the biomechanical data available today. The last, and hardest, item is comphrehensive communications. By comphrehensive we are not only talking about spoken words, but also the wealth of non-verbal cues that humans use. Such things that we take for granted, such as hand gestures, gaze of the eyes, position of the limbs, and facial gestures are all examples of non-verbal communications. It is the simulations job to use both verbal and non-verbal communications to make the judge think it is acting in a very 'human' way. 

How does this Virtual Turing Test compare to Turings original test? We have replaced the limited communications allowed by two connected computer terminals with a comphrehensive environment of sight, sound and body. We allow the judge to base his decision not only on written words, but on spoken speech, non-verbal cues, and body movement. 
The test still holds to the spirit of the original. There is still a human judge that must use his intelligence and savvy to test the subject. Like the original test, the judge has no way of telling if the subject is human or not until he interacts with it. Like the original test, the goal of the computer is to create a simulation of human action so realistic that not even other humans can tell the difference. 

The technology exists today to hold a simplistic Virtual Turing Test. As more research and work is put into Virtual Reality, AI, and biomechanics, a suitably advanced human simulation can, and will, be produced. 
4 AI Sites
http://www.geocities.com/csmba/links.html
http://www.ebi.ca/Links/AI_Sites/ai_sites.html
http://www.galaxy.com/cgi-bin/dirlist?node=47582
http://www.aaai.org/Resources/general-ai.html
http://aepia.dsic.upv.es/internet/internet-ia/resource/general.htm 

5 AI Game

http://www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/~cm1822/gameon.htm
http://search.cpan.org/search?mode=module&query=opengl
http://psychology.about.com/cs/gameai/ 
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201157675/gignewscom/002-0943422-0701631
http://www.hypography.com/info.cfm/17243.html

6心得:
AI的發展真是厲害,而且網站多的讓人看完,雖然大多數的字都不懂,能讓我想去查單字來多了解
他是在說什麼東西,跟電腦對話真是有趣,雖然時他說的話我並不了解,可是他也能跟我聊天,以後 
我要上網去看有關於AI的東西,多多充實自己,才不落伍了.