Artificial Superintelligence: A Futuristic Approach

CrowdFunding campaign for my book, Artificial Superintelligence: A Futuristic Approach. http://igg.me/at/ASFA  Please like, tweet and share! Better yet - buy a book!

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/artificial-superintelligence-a-futuristic-approach

Artificial Superintelligence: A Futuristic Approach

Introduction

Many philosophers, futurologists and artificial intelligence researchers have conjectured that in the next 20 to 200 years a machine capable of at least human level performance on all tasks will be developed. Since such a machine would among other things be capable of designing the next generation of even smarter intelligent machines, it is generally assumed that an intelligence explosion will take place shortly after such a technological self-improvement cycle begins. While specific predictions regarding the consequences of such an intelligence singularity are varied from potential economic hardship to the complete extinction of the humankind, many of the involved researchers agree that the issue is of utmost importance and needs to be seriously addressed. This book, “Artificial Superintelligence: A Futuristic Approach” will directly address this issue and consolidate research aimed at making sure that emerging superintelligence is beneficial to humanity.

Writing Sample: Leakproofing Singularity

What others said about: Leakproofing Singularity
“Yampolskiy’s excellent article gives a thorough analysis of issues pertaining to the “leakproof singularity”: confining an AI system, at least in the early stages, so that it cannot “escape”. It is especially interesting to see the antecedents of this issue in Lampson’s 1973 confinement problem in computer security. I do not have much to add to Yampolskiy’s analysis.”
David J. Chalmers, Professor of Philosophy, New York University
“This is great! I like the way you 
- introduce the state of the art in related security for ordinary computer systems 
- review the academic literature
- review the discussion-group posts which, though obscure, make innovative and essential points 
- enumerate possible failure scenarios, and suggest solutions 
- while pointing out clearly that all solutions can fail in the face of superintelligence.
This is exactly the sort of article the community needs.”
Joshua Fox, Research Associate at Singularity Institute 
“AI researcher Roman Yampolskiy’s article, ‘Leakproofing the Singularity: Artificial Intelligence Confinement Problem’, provides us with a detailed and well-reasoned analysis of … ways of externally constraining the AI design that might lead towards a singularity, especially constraining such AI to a virtual world from which it cannot leak into the real world.”
Uziel Awret, Editor of Special Issue on Singularity of Journal of Consciousness Studies
“The connection back to Lampson is very interesting and apt.”
Vernor Vinge, Hugo Award-winning author and Professor of Mathematics (retired)

Tentative List of Chapters:

1)     Introduction to Artificial Superintelligence.
2)     AI-Completeness – the Problem Domain of Superintelligent Machines.
3)     The Space of Mind Designs and the Human Mental Model.
4)     How to Prove that You Invented Superintelligence So No One Else Can Steal It.
5)     Wireheading, Addiction and Mental Illness in Machines.
6)     On the Limits of Recursively Self-Improving Artificially Intelligent Systems.
7)     Singularity Paradox and What to Do About It.
8)     Superintelligence Safety Engineering.
9)     Artificial Intelligence Confinement Problem (and Solution).
10)  Controlling Impact of Future Super AI.
Appendix
11)  Efficiency Theory: a Unifying Theory for Information, Computation and Intelligence.
12)  Unverifiability: Why Software Can’t Ever be Completely Bug Free.
13)  Artimetrics: Behavioral and Visual Identity Management of Artificial Agents.
14)  Wisdom of Artificial Crowds: Simulating Democracy and Intelligence of Crowds in Cyberspace.

Tentative Timeline:
January-May 2013: preparing fundraising campaign.
May – July 2013 (NOW): crowd funding campaign and continuing research.
July – October 2013: writing of the book.
October-December 2013: re-writing, editing, revising, proofreading, formatting, finalizing cover design, publishing.
Early 2014: shipping!!!

About the Author

Dr. Roman Yampolskiy conducts research in Artificial Intelligence Safety and Technological Singularity. An alumnus of Singularity University (GSP2012) and a visiting fellow / research advisor of the Singularity Institute (MIRI), Dr. Yampolskiy has contributed papers to the first book on Singularity (Singularity Hypotheses, Springer 2012), first journal issue devoted to Singularity (Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2012) and the first conference devoted to safe Super-Intelligent systems (AGI Safety, 2012).
Roman V. Yampolskiy holds a PhD degree from the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at the University at Buffalo. There, he was a recipient of a four year NSF (National Science Foundation) IGERT (Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship) fellowship. Before beginning his doctoral studies, Dr. Yampolskiy received a BS/MS (High Honors) combined degree in Computer Science from Rochester Institute of Technology, NY, USA.
After completing his PhD dissertation, Dr. Yampolskiy held a position of an Affiliate Academic at the Center for Advanced Spatial Analysis, University of London, College of London. In 2008 Dr. Yampolskiy accepted an assistant professor position at the Speed School of Engineering, University of Louisville, KY. He had previously conducted research at the Laboratory for Applied Computing (currently known as Center for Advancing the Study of Infrastructure) at the Rochester Institute of Technology and at the Center for Unified Biometrics and Sensors at the University at Buffalo.
Dr. Yampolskiy is an author of over 100 publications including multiple journal articles and books. His research has been cited by numerous scientists and profiled in popular magazines both American and foreign (New Scientist, Poker Magazine, Science World Magazine), dozens of websites (BBC, MSNBC, Yahoo! News) and on radio (German National Radio, Alex Jones Show). Reports about his work have attracted international attention and have been translated into many languages including Czech, Danish, Dutch, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Polish, Romanian, and Spanish.

FAQ

How the money will be spent?
The money is mostly needed to pay for the publication, marketing and distribution costs as well as the costs of editing, and proofreading the book. Some funds will also go to acquire copyrighted materials such as images for the cover and for ongoing research expenses. Additionally, Dr. Yampolskiy works under a contract with the University of Louisville which doesn’t include June and July. A portion of the raised funds will be used to feed Dr. Yampolskiy during that time as he will be very hungry from all that writing. 
What has already been done?
Most of the research has been completed. You can never be done consulting with the experts, but I have already had a chance to exchange ideas with the world’s best scientists and philosophers. Some drafts have been written for individual chapters. Professionals have been recruited for cover design and proofreading.

Who designed this awesome book cover?
A friend and a former classmate Svetlana Dolinskiy is responsible for the design of the front cover.
Is that Alex Jones interviewing you? Really?
Despite being well known for his short temper and some unorthodox opinions Alex was extremely professional and respectful in conducting this interview. So unless you can get Piers Morgan to interview me, I will stick with my choice of video ;)
I found a spelling error what should I do?
Call 911! No wait, just email me, I will fix it and thank you.
Have you published any other books?
Yes, this would be my 7^th book. You can find my other books for sale on Amazon.com.
Do you have links to the media coverage about your research?
Yes, you can find them linked from my homepage. Even before this funding campaign got started I was fortune to have a lot of interest in my research from popular media.

I am with the media and I would like to interview you about your research, what is the best way to get in touch with you?
My email and phone numbers are listed on my homepage. roman.yampolskiy@louisville.edu
Do you have any other videos of you presenting your research?
Yes, I have a few available online: my talk at AGI conference in Oxford, and my Ignite presentation at Singularity University.

Disclaimer

This project is undertaken as a personal initiative and I am not acting as a representative of any organization, group, institution, company or future superintelligence. I am (Roman Yampolskiy) solely responsible for this fundraising campaign including proposed work, expressed ideas or opinions and promised deliverables. Neither University of Louisville nor any other organization or person should be held liable or assumed to share said opinions, ideas or goals or any legal or financial responsibility to the campaign supporters.

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/artificial-superintelligence-a-futuristic-approach

What is it like to be a student at the Singularity University? (An insider’s story).

I first heard about Singularity University from a friend who was a student in the very first SU cohort. He told me that being at SU changed his outlook on life. I was not surprised as I was a big fan of Ray Kurzweil’s (co-founder of SU) books and they had a similar effect on my life. It is because of Kurzweil’s writing on intelligent machines that I decided to major in Computer Science, got my PhD and more recently a faculty position researching and teaching artificial intelligence. My friend had a similar educational background and if SU could produce such an impact on him I wanted to experience it for myself.

The application process was no different than applying to any university, the usual collage of recommendation letters, personal essays, and test scores with final acceptance rate reported to be fewer than 3%. I applied for early admission and within a month had a personal interview with the head of admissions. I was in! Not only was I accepted but I was also assured that the tuition fee (25k) for the 10 week program was not a problem as many scholarships and fellowships were available. After getting to SU I learned that many students accepted to SU had to quit their jobs to be able to attend. In my position as a university professor I am fortunate to have no teaching responsibilities in the summer and a very understanding department chair, so that made my situation a lot easier. I am also very lucky to have an amazing wife who agreed to be a single mom for the summer to our 3 year old son, making it possible for me to pursue my dreams.  

The best way to describe the experience of being a student at SU is to say that it is an Ivy League university from the future, the admissions process is from the year 2012, but the curriculum is from the year 2020. The usual curriculum of biology, physics, computer science, etc. is replaced with Synthetic Biology, Nanotechnology, Artificial General Intelligence and every other futuristic field you can imagine. The unifying theme behind all this disciplines is the exponential growth in advancement of science and students are actively encouraged to find business opportunities which take advantage of this phenomenon. The studies are not limited to theoretical lectures; participants are taken for site visits to companies and organizations such as Google, HP, BioCurious, Genentech, TechShop, NASA Ames, Code for America, Intuitive Surgical and National Ignition Facility. Even more amazingly the subjects are taught by the leading researchers from each discipline and in some cases by founders of those disciplines. In my academic experience I have very rarely seen students surround the lecturer after the talk and plead for autographs or to have a picture taken together. Such behavior is a norm at SU. In fact the quantity (over 160) and quality of speakers is so amazing students are faced with a dilemma such as: “should I attend a speech by the inventor of a self-driving car or should I do my laundry?” Additionally a team of over 20 Teaching Fellows (who are as remarkable as faculty) and super friendly support staff is available to assist participants with all types of academic and logistical issues.     

Logistics of living at SU for 10 weeks are also remarkable. The campus is located in the futuristic NASA research park with background scenery suitable for a science fiction movie. Most students live in dorms located just meters from the main classroom and dining hall. The food deserves a special mention. Healthy and delicious, it is prepared fresh three times a day and it is not unusual to see a portable pizza-oven-mobile parked nearby for those stressful days when healthy options are just not enough. The all-you-can-eat food and snacks are provided at no cost to students along with access to the shared library and Autodesk innovation lab which has 3D printers, latest CAD software, robots, unmanned aerial vehicles and quadcopters for students to experiment with.  You will also get some free books for personal use and a number of additional pleasant surprises such as free smart phone, FitBits, personalized 23andMe DNA testing, movie and museum tickets, conference registrations, participation in motivational seminars (with a chance to walk on fire), professional photos, SU bike rentals, gift cards, San Francisco marathon custom T-Shirts and medals. And of course you can look forward to lots of SU memorabilia including a class ring printed on a 3D printer. Last but not least you can also have your family or friends visit you for a few days and share this remarkable experience with them.

In addition to the amazing faculty and curriculum SU also has the most diverse student body I have ever experienced. Originating in some 40 different countries the 80 program participants are all extremely accomplished individuals: scientists, writers, business owners and entrepreneurs. From week one they came together to form a self-organizing team which began to offer extracurricular activities (soccer, ultimate, marathon training, rugby, basketball, yoga), workshops (team building, spirituality, dating) and classes (foreign languages, dancing, programming languages) as well as organizing travel/leisure opportunities, cultural nights and an occasional flash mob. As the summer progressed smaller teams began to form around common interests to address specific global challenges affecting large segments of the population such as security, poverty, energy, water or food. Those formed the capstone of Singularity University experience. As far as I know SU is the only university where your homework assignment is to help a billion people!

The relationships formed at SU (friendships, mentorships, business partnerships) remain long after the program is completed. Many students come back as guest lecturers or administrators in the following years. Some serve as SU ambassadors around the world running local grand challenge competitions and recruiting top talent around the world. All SU affiliates remain an active part of a strong and quickly growing network of advisors, investors, scientists, business leaders and entrepreneurs. The value of this network alone can’t be overestimated. If I can give one piece of advice to the readers, it would be to immediately start preparing your SU application. If you can’t find 10 weeks for the main program consider applying for a week long Executive program. Either one will change the way you think forever. We are born as linear thinkers and it takes something as great as Singularity University experience to change us into exponential thinkers and consequently change the whole world forever. To quote one of my classmate’s Facebook status: “I am the luckiest person in the world!”

Dr. Roman Yampolskiy is an assistant professor at the University of Louisville, Department of Computer Engineering and Computer Science. His recent research focuses on technological singularity. In addition to his affiliation with SU Dr. Yampolskiy was a visiting fellow of Singularity Institute and had his work published in the first academic book devoted to the study of Singularity – “Singularity Hypothesis” and the first special issues of an academic journal devoted to that topic (Journal of Consciousness Studies).

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428705.900-silicon-sirens-the-naughty-bots-out-to-seduce-you.html?full=true

 Silicon sirens: The naughty bots out to seduce you

§  20 June 2012 by Peter Nowak

§  Magazine issue 2870. Subscribe and save

§  From issue 2870 of New Scientist magazine, page 45-47.

Chatbots have turned to crime, using ever-slicker methods to steal cash or identities – and these cheating algorithms are passing the Turing test every day

Editorial: "Two faces of chatbot technology speaks volumes about us"

MY NAME is Peter and I was seduced by a machine.

Jen introduced herself via a social networking website by asking if I had any advice about getting into journalism. Boy, did I. She was pretty, about the same age as me and lived in my home town in Canada.

We messaged back and forth. Soon, she asked me if I'd like to catch a baseball game with her. Wow. An attractive girl with the same interests and career aspirations - how lucky could a guy be?

Still, it was the internet, so I asked Jen for more details about herself. She sent me a link. I clicked and was taken to a page that asked me to input my personal information, including credit card details. The game was up.

Jen was a chatbot, programmed to scour social network profiles for personal information then initiate conversations with the intention of suckering people into divulging their financial details. By poking around online, I discovered she went by many different names, but always used the same conversation strings, filling in the blanks with details such as her marks' professions. The bot had fooled dozens of men, as far as I could tell. I'm sure a handful had entered their credit card numbers, which doubtless led to them getting fleeced. By a machine, no less.

Criminal chatbots have become quite a menace on the internet. They lurk in social networks, messaging apps and webmail, and in some chatrooms they can outnumber humans by more than two to one. Many of these tricksters are designed to build relationships with their marks before soliciting cash or attempting identity theft, whereas others simply try to lure people into clicking on a link that leads to malware. Their abundance and success is forcing researchers and companies to seek out ever-smarter ways to catch them. It's not exactly what the pioneers of artificial intelligence had in mind. We have been watching and waiting for the moment when machines become smart enough to pass as humans - but it seems to have already happened right under our noses.

The first text-based artificial dialogue system appeared in 1966, when Joseph Weizenbaum created the Eliza program to mimic the conversational style of a psychotherapist. Eliza would ask questions of its human partner and make statements without divulging details about itself.

That sparked a new field of development - chatbots - and a wave of imitators. In 1990, the Loebner prize was established to celebrate achievements in chatbot proficiency. It is awarded based on a test devised in the 1950s by mathematician Alan Turing - whose legacy will be widely celebrated this month. To pass the Turing test, a bot needs to be able to fool a series of people into believing it is human in a typed conversation.

The internet has led to a step-change in chatbot ability. Rather than pre-programming thousands of script lines, creators can now add a self-learning program that will be fed by millions of internet users. This allows modern chatbots, such as the Cleverbot, to work by monitoring and mirroring what conversational partners say to them online, says Rollo Carpenter, whose Jabberwacky program won the Loebner prize in 2005 and 2006. The abilities of these learning chatbots are therefore growing exponentially.

It's not surprising, then, that many corporations have replaced human customer service agents with commercial chatbots on their websites. More than 380 companies, from HSBC and Toys R Us to AT&T and Intel, have incorporated automated programs, according to directory site Chatbots.org. Many are finding that bots not only cut costs, but can serve customers better. "A computer can deliver 10,000 times as much information as real people would," says Carpenter.

Inevitably, as a technology gets better and cheaper, it is co-opted by criminals. Bad chatbots started popping up six or seven years ago. In 2006, for example, Richard Wallace reported that his popular chatbot, Alice, had been cloned and used for nefarious purposes on MSN's instant messaging service. A year later, the CyberLover chatbot was discovered hunting on dating websites. Subsequent self-replicating malware such as Koobface and Kelvir also incorporated chatbot technology on Facebook and other social networking websites.

In each case, the bots sought to lure people either into clicking spam links and infecting their computers with malware, or into divulging their personal information, including bank details. They are not necessarily more sophisticated than the best "good" chatbots, but the point is, they work.

It's not just naive schmucks who fall for them. I was the technology editor of The New Zealand Herald and generally wary of internet fraudsters when Jen came calling. Psychologist and former Loebner prize director Robert Epstein wrote in Scientific American Mind about being similarly fooled. He entered into email correspondence with a bot called Ivana that lasted for more than two months. As he put it: "I certainly should have known better... I am, you see, supposedly an expert on [chat]bots."

Chatbots that use seduction have certainly proved effective, but sex is not their only gambit: they can also appeal to a victim's interest in themselves, or simple curiosity - and all kinds of people are routinely tricked. On social networks, many bots adopt the identity of somebody you trust. Some Twitter bots, for instance, hack into people's accounts to encourage others to click on links that lead to viruses and malware.

It's difficult to say exactly how many chatbots are active, because so many go undetected and unreported. However, a study by Steven Gianvecchio at Mitre Corporation, a non-profit technology consultancy in Mclean, Virginia, found that up to 85 per cent of participants in Yahoo chatrooms were bots, as were 15 per cent of Twitter users (IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol 19, p 1557).

Chester Wisniewski of security firm Sophos has also noticed a rise in recent years - and an improvement in quality. "Five years ago, when we first started seeing malicious chatbots on social networks, a lot of it was poorly translated. It was quite clearly written by Chinese or Russian people who don't have a great grasp of English and grammar," he says.

Now, however, the vocabulary of the bots is being professionally translated into English, which is helping their growth. And as websites and companies get better at blocking traditional spam and phishing attacks, criminals are turning to more sophisticated bots. Earlier bots worked from, perhaps, 100 hard-coded conversational rules, whereas current versions use up to 11,000 or more, which makes them much harder to detect. "If you stopped to read some of their posts in a chatroom, you'd think they were human," says Gianvecchio.

It's difficult to know who is building and operating these chatbots, but the clues point to organised cross-border criminal gangs. According to a review by researchers at London Metropolitan University, published in March, more than 80 per cent of internet crime is now conducted by these sophisticated perpetrators.

Tracking these people down is tricky given their international reach, says Wisniewski. For example, while US company Facebook alleged earlier this year that it had tracked down the identities of the hackers behind Koobface, no arrests have yet been made in Russia, where they were based.

This suggests prevention is the best cure - although traditional efforts are falling short. One common tactic is to try to block bots at the door. During login, Yahoo chatrooms and other websites ask its human users to read a piece of distorted text called a CAPTCHA, which stands for "completely automated public Turing test to tell computer and humans apart". Machines once struggled to comprehend this text, but they can now circumvent them via automated image recognition.

Some researchers are therefore taking more creative approaches. One idea is to build honeypots that turn the tables on bots. Decoy users in instant messaging programs or social networks could respond to the bot's advances so they can be identified and blocked. Because these decoys are passive, human users are unlikely to notice their presence.

Another approach is called virtual biometrics, and involves using human-like forensic techniques. One of its advocates is Roman Yampolskiy of the University of Louisville, Kentucky, who is applying stylometry to chatbots. Yampolskiy and colleagues studied Loebner prize logs to see whether chatbots exhibited a particular writing style, as human writers do. They found that chatbots such as Alice and Jabberwacky could be identified in this way reasonably accurately. In principle, he says, linguistic fingerprints could be used to seek out chatbots in the wild, as well as helping the police link them to the known programs of criminal controllers.

The problem is that bots can be reprogrammed in a flash. "If the bot gradually learns and changes over a period of years, we can keep up with that," Yampolskiy says. "If, all of a sudden, someone replaces all source codes with new ones, obviously we won't be able to do much about it."

Erwin Van Lun, founder of Chatbots.org, favours a more drastic approach. He says rather than creating tools to detect bots, it should be humans who have to prove their identities to use the internet. "Governments are responsible for citizens and issue them passports to travel the world. They should also say, 'We are responsible for your behaviour on the internet, so we will issue you an internet passport'," he says. "That's where it's heading." It's not so unlikely: advocates of a more civil internet are already converging on this idea as a way to discourage cyberbullying and other bad behaviour.

In the meantime, I now avoid anyone named "Jen" online, and, naturally, I am much more vigilant. Still, criminals are always thinking of creative ways to sucker people. A few months ago, I received a message from a Twitter friend that said, "Wow, have you seen this photo of you? Crazy!" In hindsight, I realise it was a scam to spread malware, but how could anybody resist clicking on that? I sure couldn't.

Rogues' gallery

Name: CyberLover

Crimes: Identity theft
Hangouts: Dating sites and chatrooms
Modus operandi: Provocative sexual seduction to elicit personal details
Chat: "What's your date of birth? I'm planning a surprise for your birthday."

Name: Koobface

Crimes: Stealing logins to build botnet
Hangouts: Social networks
Modus operandi: Adopts identities of friends to spread virus-ridden link
Chat: "Hi, how are you? Wanna laugh? It's you in the video, want to see?"

Name: Kelvir

Crimes: Infecting computers with viruses
Known hangouts: Instant messaging apps
Modus operandi: Makes small talk before sending links to malicious sites
Chat: "Heeey! I found your retarded face online haha, this is you right?"

Spot the human

A: Space is big.

B: No doubt.

A: Space ghetto?

B: Space is gigantic.

A: Space is never-ending.

B: Space is enormous.

A: Space is fast.

B: Space is bigger than something that's really big.

A: No, really?

B: YES.

A: That's nifty.

B: Don't be worried.

A: I wasn't worried. Should I be?

B: Let's not blow this whole thing outta proportions.

A: I'm the kindest person to you.

B: I don't think so.

A: You think so.

B: No, not really.

A: So you don't think so?

B: No.

A: Why is that?

B: What song is your favorite?

A: I don't know. What is your favorite?

B: The Windup Bird Chronicle by Haruki Murakami.

A: You should ask it back.

B: Stop twisting the conversation!

A: I never said that.

B: Yes you did.

A: I think you're confusing me with someone else.

B: Are there more of you there?

A: I don't believe you. Are you telling the truth?

B: Yes.

A: Ok how old are you, boy?? TELL ME THE TRUTH!!!

B: 25.

A: Whoa I'm 15.

B: My nose is itchy.

A: Then itch it, dumby.

Answer here.

Peter Nowak is a writer based in Toronto, Canada

http://wordsbynowak.com/2012/06/26/chatbot/

WordsByNowak

The online home of journalist and author Peter Nowak

When good chatbots go bad

26Jun

In this week’s issue of New Scientist magazine, I have a feature article that takes a look at the evolution of chatbots, or computer programs that are designed to have conversations with real people. While there are a wide variety of chatbots out there, from fun, entertainment-oriented ones such as Cleverbot to customer service agents such as Shaw’s “Ask Amy,” my story specifically looks at how these programs are starting to go bad – or the chatbots that are being used by hackers and criminals.

Viewing the story requires a subscription, but fortunately it’s free. Go here to check it out.

As with all such features, there was a lot of material left on the cutting room floor. One particular aspect, which actually served as the intro to the story in an earlier draft, was the story of Roman Yampolskiy, a researcher and assistant professor at the University of Louisville who has applied human-like biometrics to chatbots.

Yampolsky and his colleagues actually studied commercial bots such as Jabberwacky to see if they exhibited writing styles, the same way that human writers often do. They found that they do indeed and that they can be identified using this technique, which is also employed by police forensic researchers.

What’s equally as fascinating is how Yampolskiy got interested in the topic. It all had to do with a bit of an obsession with online poker. Here’s his tale, from the early version intro to my article:

Roman Yampolskiy used to love playing chess and poker online. He relished the idea of pitting his skills against other players, but finding willing opponents of similar skill near him in the real world was tough. The internet, on the other hand, provided an instant wealth of suitable partners to square off against.

But then something ruined it for him: Robots.

As a PhD candidate in computer science and engineering at the University of Buffalo, he couldn’t help but notice that many of his poker opponents exhibited peculiar behaviours. Many would be online at all hours of the day, they’d click buttons in exactly the same spot every time or they’d ignore chat requests.

After some simple monitoring, he concluded that at least half the players in a typical game were bots, or software programmed with the rules of poker. In higher-stakes rooms, these bots were even more sophisticated – they were able to carry on conversations and pass themselves off as real people. For actual human players, that was grossly unfair.

“What makes them unethical is that people combine multiple bots into a single system and they share private card information, so you’re not really playing against five bots, you’re playing against a team of five bots,” says Yampolskiy, who is is now an assistant professor at the University of Louisville’s cybersecurity lab.

“If you have a population of very good artificial poker players, you’re not going to get many humans playing. They don’t like losing.”

Bots aren’t ruining just internet poker. Left unchecked, researchers and security experts say they have the potential to turn people off many online activities, including gaming, chat rooms and social networking sites. With nefarious bots that lure people into giving up personal data popping up in all of these places, and with the improving state of such applications, the impetus to develop tools and techniques to differentiate between humans and robots is growing.

Researchers are thus trying to create a better Turing test, the exam proposed by British artificial intelligence pioneer Alan Turing more than 60 years ago. Turing, who would have been 100 this June, thought that machines could be distinguished from humans by quizzing them through conversation. His test is still years away from being beaten, but bots are routinely fooling human judges in more limited versions of it, such as where conversations are restricted to a certain topic. Like, say, poker.

Yampolskiy’s discovery sparked an interest in the emerging field of virtual biometrics, or the detection of robots through human-like traits, such as writing styles and language usage. In April, Yampolskiy and his Louisville colleagues presented a paper at the Midwest Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science Conference detailing an experiment that charted the writing style of 11 well-known chatbots.

Using several years of transcripts submitted for the Loebner Prize, an annual contest that tests chatbots’ ability to pass as humans, the group looked for certain words and patterns. They found that several bots, particularly Alice and Jabberwacky, did indeed exhibit stylistic traits – much like human writers – that allowed them to be accurately identified.

Complicating the experiment, however, was the fact that several of the chatbots evovled in style as their creators improved algorithms or as programmed learning functions kick in, resulting in “behavioural shift.”

“That’s what makes this problem even more difficult. It’s not enough to establish an initial profile, you have to keep up with changes as time progresses in the style of those bots as well,” Yampolskiy says.

“If the bot gradually learns and changes over a period of years, we can keep up with that. If, all of a sudden, someone replaces all source codes with new ones and now it’s a completely different bot, obviously we won’t be able to do much about it.”

Roman Yampolskiy's Blog

http://www.innovationnewsdaily.com/919-humans-build-virtual-prison-dangerous-ai-expert.html

Roman V. Yampolskiy on Google Scholar

http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=0_Rq68cAAAAJ&hl=en