6 investigate how hard (or easy) it

6 pts In the introductory lecture we considered four frameworks for analysing agents at different explanatory levels: namely, those of Dennett, Wilson, Marr and Newell & Simon. Choose any two of those frameworks and briefly analyze their similarities and differences by comparing and contrasting them.Explaining/describing/predicting agents is a complex taskExplaining/describing/predicting intelligent agents is even more complexThe frameworks discussed in the first lecture introduce a sort of a generalization about the components that make up that object.This process trades accuracy for complexity. It makes a problem easierDennett’s first level is the physical stance which does not really introduce a lot of abstraction. Since it concerns with the domains of physics and chemistry. Newell and simons symbol level can be compared with dennetts second design stance.They both deal with the purpose and function of agents. Design stance focuses more on the ‘why’ things happen while symbol level is more concerned with ‘how’ they are possible(so maybe it also similar to dennets physical stance)Both their last abstractions are very similar. The intentional stance and the knowledge level. Both of them are concerned with goals or intentions of an agent and do not care much about any internal workings.8 pts total Imagine that you want to investigate how hard (or easy) it is for speakers of English to learn how to use the writing system in question 5 below.5 pts Briefly outline an approach to addressing this question based in experimental psychology.In experimental psychology we ask a question about our observations on which we base our research to make an educated guess, known as a hypothesis, to answer the question at hand and make a probable prediction. This hypothesis is then tested through experimental procedures (in this case perhaps through listening, reading and other linguistic exercises) to check how accurate our prediction actually is. The data gathered is then analyzed and if the results do not support our predictions then we have to revise the hypothesis. If the results are supportive, however, further predictions are made to solidify the hypothesis.!!!!!!!!!!!!3 pts Imagine further, that one of your collaborators suggests that you should have your participants give an introspection-based report in order to address this question. What difficulties might the use of introspection create in this case?Introspection can be affected by cognitive biases that we fail to tackle due to the lack of awareness about their existence. Seeing oneself as anything more positive or negative than reality acts as an obstacle for introspection, denying our ability to be candid and impartial. Many biases function in the impenetrable subconscious and the adaptive unconscious brain and can not be detected or corrected.8 pts total These days, Stanley Milgram (1963) might have considerable difficulty getting ethics approval for his famous experiments on obedience to authority. 3 pts Apart from ethical objections that are based on the likely harm that might be imposed on his subjects, what other ethical objections can be raised to replicating these famous experiments?Firstly, the aspect of deception where the participants were deceived into believing that they were actually administering a shock to a real person on the receiving end, who in-fact happened to be reacting in accordance with Milgram.https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.htmlSecondly, the withdrawal procedure of the experiment was constructed in such a way so as to discourage the act of opting out through a set of 4 verbal phrases e.g. “You have no other choice, you must go on”.https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html 5 pts Would these other (non-harm-based) objections alone be strong enough to deny ethical approval for the experiments, in your judgment? Why or why not?According to my judgment whilst also keeping in mind that this experiment revolves around obedience, the withdrawal procedure most certainly does not portray the act of withdrawing as a very welcoming option therefore undermining the participants’ autonomy or independence that the word ‘participant’ itself serves to uphold according to the British Psychological Society (BPS) Code of Human Research Ethics, making a strong case for the denial of ethical approval. https://www.bps.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/code_of_human_research_ethics.pdfMilgram, however, argued that his withdrawal procedure was justified on account of the study being about obedience but the hypothesis can possibly be tested through different methods, especially without deceiving the participants into believing they were inflicting pain upon someone. Solomon Asch (1951) investigated the intensity of the effect of societal pressure on conformity through a vision test. Even though this experiment involved the use of accomplices just as there were in Milgram’s, they gave wrong answers only in a set of critical trials and at no point was the real participant being deceived into living through the traumatizing experience.With the presence of better, less traumatizing means to test a hypothesis, the ethical approval of Milgram’s experiment becomes highly unlikely.14 pts total Find out about one application of AI, not a class of applications but a specific system. Use headers corresponding to each of the questions below to describe the application in point form. Apart from the lecture slides and Poole & Mackworth, 2017 some resources for your search are in the AAAI Digital Library (available from the website of the UBC ICICS/CS Reading Room at https://www.cs.ubc.ca/our-department/facilities/reading-room/articles-indexes), including the AI Magazine, the proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and the Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence (IAAI), and other conferences, workshops and symposia on that site. 2 pts What does the application do? (e.g., controls a spacecraft, performs medical diagnoses)OpenAI’s bot plays the game Defense of The Ancients (DOTA) after learning it from scratch.Describe at least one for each:2 pts goals/preferences that the application hasTo be able to learn and demonstrate the learned gameplay in complex situations involving real, human opponents.2 pts types of prior knowledge that it needs to perform intelligentlyThe bot needs knowledge of the functions of the character and the functions of other characters. It needs prior knowledge of the negative nature of the damage and how to avoid losing health points to damage. This will encourage it to retreat when faced with danger or step up when it feels like it could overcome the obstacle and persevere. 2 pts types of experiences that it does (or could) learn from the environment in order to improve its performance over timeIt learns through experience and classical reinforcement, by gathering examples from its environment within the game. 2 pts types of observations that it needs about the environmentTerrain: The bot can walk on the ground but cannot walk through a tree or wall because they are examples of objects with a certain mass that occupy a certain amount of area.2 pts types of actions that it performs Use your own judgement when your source does not explicitly provide (some of) the above information.The bot self learns and eventually is able to plan, attack and even deceive opponents according to its advantage. The bot played the world’s best Dota players such as Artour Babaev and remained undefeated against most of them. 2 pt References: where did you get the information about the application? What books, articles, or web pages would be useful references for others wanting to learn more about this application? https://blog.openai.com/dota-2/ 12 pts total Answer the following questions using the vocabulary introduced in class.1 pts What kind of writing system is shown below?I think the writing system shown below is a combination of alphabets and  syllabaries.2 pts Explain carefully why you made your choice using the vocabulary introduced in class/readings. The reason why I think the writing system shown below is a combination of alphabets and syllabaries is because the top row consists of only consonants and vowels, just as it would in an alphabetic writing system. The bottom row, on the other hand, consists of syllables (consonant plus vowel) and therefore is most likely syllabaries.!!!4 pts There are two symbols that could represent /m/. Are these symbols contrastive? Why or why not?While the two symbols themselves are contrastive, since they both represent , I do not think that they differ in pronunciation as they do in spelling. The way I see it, it could be the same case as it is with and , even though they both mean the same thing and are pronounced the same as well.3 pts Write /apega/, /tamano/ and /potato/. (Hint: to digitize this easily, write out the answer on a white piece of paper and take a clear picture of it with your phone.)/apega/        /tamano/         /potato/         2 pts Imagine someone who only knows this writing system/language, who meets people who speak another language that has the sound /z/. They want to use this writing system to write the sound /z/. How might they represent that sound? Justify your answer.If the mentioned person wants to use the writing system I believe is shown below then they can easily use the English alphabetic system to write the sound /z/ through the consonant .9 pts total Answer the following questions using the vocabulary introduced in class.1 pt Identify the type of writing system shown below and explain your choice.The writing system shown below could most probably be syllabic alphabets/abugidas. The reason why is because although the individual vowels and consonants are not shown, it can be clearly seen that the writing system mentioned has consonants that have an inherent vowel that can be modified (through diacritics) and thus changes the entire pronunciation and meaning of the word.!!!2 pts How is the contrast between /g/ and /d/ indicated by this script? Explain your answer with reference to the words./g/ and /d/ seem like two completely different letters at first glance but upon close observation, /g/ appears to be somewhat similar to /d/ if /d/ in /l?da/ was rotated 90 degrees clockwise and had a line (?????) angled inwards as it is for /g/ in /gareli/. The main difference between the two is that /g/ in /gareli/ is open towards the left whereas the /d/ in /l?da/ is open towards the right.!!2 pts How is the contrast between /e/ and /?/ indicated? Explain your answer with reference to the words.Both /e/ and /?/ in /gareli/ and /l?da/ have a dash above the letter. The main difference, however, is the diagonal diacritic that points to the right at the bottom of the letter that is only written for /?/ and not /e/ so as to signify the difference between the two.!!2 pts How is the contrast between /i/ and /?/ shown? Explain your answer with reference to the words.Once again as was the case in b., both /i/ and /?/ have a similarity – a  curve on top of the letter. To signify the difference, however, the /?/ also has a diagonal diacritic that points to the right at the bottom of the letter in /rash?ngo/ as the /?/ does in /l?da/.!! 2 pts Based on the answers you gave in b.-d., what is the most likely way the distinction between /o/ and /?/ is represented? Why?The most likely way the /?/ might be represented differently than /o/ is through a diagonal diacritic that points to the right at the bottom of the letter, as can be seen with /?/ /rash?ngo/ and the /?/ in /l?da/.!!4 pts Give one example of a question about the mind that is metaphysical, and one that is epistemological.Metaphysical: What is consciousness? Epistemological: How do we know that we know?4 pts With reference to your chosen examples in question 7, explain the contrast between these two sorts of questions (in a few sentences).I certainly feel the metaphysical question is relatively structured and specific in comparison to the epistemological question which has a relatively wider, ambiguous way of being comprehended and answered. 5 pts Pick one of your questions from question 7, and write a brief paragraph explaining how results from computer science, psychology, or linguistics, could contribute to an enquiry into that question. If there is no possibility of them making such a contribution, explain why not.!!!!!!!!!!!!5 pts In his 1952 discussion with Turing, Braithwaite, and Jefferson, Newman remarked (on p. 503) that engineers will be unlikely to speed up computation by more than a couple of thousand times. This proved to be rather an underestimation. How much does this matter to the point that Newman was making?This is a classic example of us as a species thinking of our growth as linear rather than exponential!!. We fail to realize that as time passes, we continually better equip ourselves with the means to better tackle the problems we could not yesterday. Newman attempted to explain that we are never going to be on a level of progress where we can produce a mechanical brain that can perform better than a human brain!!, which may or may not be the case but it most certainly cannot be ruled out specially considering modern trends. I am pretty sure it could be said with utmost conviction once upon a time that humans would never be able to fly from point A to B but with the increasing rate of growth and inflow of technological advancements, the impossible slowly gradually turns possible. It is comparable to a production possibility frontier (PPF) where a point outside the PPF is only unattainable till you experience an outward shift of the graph.