Plenary analysis demonstrates the limitations of the traditional Turing test for creative intelligence in generative artificial intelligence, highlighting the need for novel evaluation schemes.
Alan Turing has introduced Turing test in 1950 where it has been used to evaluate the Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a benchmark for determining whether a machine can exhibit human-like intelligence.In this era AI has boosted massively due to data science and bigdata, which raise questions about the relevance and limitations of the traditional Turing test especially for the creative intelligence.Generative AI technologies like ChatGPT, Google Bard, Grmine and Bing Chat passing the Turing test is no longer perceived as a groundbreaking achievement.These sophisticated NLP algorithms and deep and hyper-neural networks can engage in human-like conversations effortlessly.Therefore, many proposes the "Modern Turing Test" as a more comprehensive measure of AI capabilities.When considering creative multimedia apps like DaleE3, which capable of creative art and music composing apps are capable of introducing novelty.However, Turing test has played a crucial role in the development of AI, its limitations have become increasingly apparent in light of recent technological advancements.When considering creative AI, it is essential to consider the broader spectrum of human capabilities where creative thinking, understanding and representation which are playing major role where current AI technologies have not focused well.By continuously rethinking and innovating novel evaluation schemes, it may provide a deeper understanding of AI's capabilities and unlock new methodologies in artificial capable intelligence.In this plenary speech, the current AI evaluation methods with respective to the creative machines to be discussed and challenged.There are various claims represented to show the outfit of the testing of creative machines through the areas of machine generated music scores, paintings, food receipts, and animations.From the examples of the DeepMind study and common google AI applications and the claims can be widely shown.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lochandaka Ranatunga (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: