The study explores and highlights the direct relationship between contemporary knowledge, paradigms, aims, and public expectations in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and its definitions. For the purpose of this research, the division of the stages of the development of AI was used for analogies to the seasons; spring to winter of AI. The history of AI is covered here only in the range necessary to point out this relationship with the possibilities of derivingthe resulting definitions. Examples of period-typical AI definitions are given for each period. This historical excursion is then used as a background for thinking about the form (not the content) of the definition of AI that is appropriate to the current state of the field and its paradigm, focus, and use. The current discussion on the shape of the definition of AI within the framework of EUlegislation is outlined. The form of a suitable definition of AI for the present is examined from the perspective of interested parties, such as multinational entities, business organisations, and other stakeholders, and is compared with some already valid definitions of these entities. A paradox in the definitions of AI, which are always too “narrow and broad at the same time” from a certainpoint of view, is pointed out. Finally, the possibility of deploying a fractal defi nition with a fixed rational-moral core but changing content with respect to the levels at which it is applied is explored within a conceptual ideation. This operational fractal definition could, in principle, resolve the ever-present “broadness-narrowness” paradox.
Tomáš Zemčík (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: