Skip to main content

Turing Test: 50 Years Later

  • Chapter

Part of the Studies in Cognitive Systems book series (COGS,volume 30)

Abstract

The Turing Test is one of the most disputed topics in artificial intelligence, philosophy of mind, and cognitive science. This paper is a review of the past 50 years of the Turing Test. Philosophical debates, practical developments and repercussions in related disciplines are all covered. We discuss Turing’s ideas in detail and present the important comments that have been made on them. Within this context, behaviorism, consciousness, the ‘other minds’ problem, and similar topics in philosophy of mind are discussed. We also cover the sociological and psychological aspects of the Turing Test. Finally, we look at the current situation and analyze programs that have been developed with the aim of passing the Turing Test. We conclude that the Turing Test has been, and will continue to be, an influential and controversial topic.

Key words

  • chatbots
  • Chinese Room
  • consciousness
  • Imitation Game
  • intelligence
  • Loebner Contest
  • philosophy of mind
  • Turing Test

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-94-010-0105-2_2
  • Chapter length: 56 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-94-010-0105-2
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   149.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference

  • Abelson, RP. (1968), Simulation of Social Behavior’, in G. Lindzey and E. Aronson, eds. Handbook of Social Psychology Reading, MA.: Addison Wesley, pp. 274–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alper, G. (1990), ‘A Psychoanalyst Takes the Turing Test’, Psychoanalytic Review 77 (1), pp. 59–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, D. (1987), ‘Is the Chinese Room the Real Thing?’, Philosophy 62, pp. 389–393.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Barresi, J. (1987), ‘Prospects for the Cyberiad: Certain Limits on Human Self-Knowledge in the Cybernetic Age’, Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 17, pp. 19–46.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bieri, P. (1988), ‘Thinking Machines: Some Reflections on the Turing Test’, Poetics Today 9(1), pp. 163–186.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Block, N. (1978), ‘Troubles with Functionalism’, in C.W. Savage, ed, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Vol. 9: Perception and Cognition, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minneapolis Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Block, N. (1981), ‘Psychologism and Behaviorism’, Philosophical Review 90, pp. 5–43.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Block, N. (1995), ‘The Mind as the Software of the Brain’, In D. Osherson, L. Gleitman, S. Kosslyn, E. Smith and S. Sternberg, eds., An Invitation to Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press. Boden M. (1988), ‘Escaping from the Chinese Room’, in Computer Models of the Mind, Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bringsjord, S. (1992), What Robots Can and Can’t Be, Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bringsjord, S. (1994), ‘Could, How Could We Tell If, and Should — Androids Have Inner Lives?’, in K.M. Ford, C. Glymour and P. Hayes, eds. Android Epistemology, Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press, pp. 93–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bringsjord, S. (1996), ‘The Inverted Turing Test is Provably Redundant’. Psycoloquy 7(29). http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy

  • Chomsky, N. (1975), Reflections on Language, Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, T. (1992), ‘The Turing Test as a Novel Form of Hermeneutics’, International Studies in Philosophy 24(1), pp. 17–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colby, K.M. (1981), ‘Modeling a Paranoid Mind’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4(4), pp. 515–560.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Colby, K.M. Hilf, F.D. and Weber, S. (1971), ‘Artificial Paranoia’, Artificial Intelligence 2, pp. 1–25.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Colby, K.M. Hilf, F.D., Weber, S. and Kraemer, (1972), ‘Turing-like Indistinguishability Tests for the Validation of a Computer Simulation of Paranoid Processes’, Artificial Intelligence 3, pp.199–222.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, D.J. (1991), ‘Artificial Intelligence and Personal Identity’, Synthese 88, pp. 399–417.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H.M. (1990), Artificial Experts: Social Knowledge and Intelligent Machines, Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H.M. (1997), ‘The Editing Test for the Deep Problem of AI’, Psycoloquy 8(1). http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?8.01 .

  • Copeland, B.J. (1993), ‘The Curious Case of the Chinese Gym’, Synthese 95, pp. 173–186.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cowley, S.J. and MacDorman, K.F. (1995), ‘Simulating Conversations: The Communion Game’, AI and Society 9, pp. 116–137.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Crockett, L. (1994), ‘The Turing Test and the Frame Problem: Al’s Mistaken Understanding of Intelligence, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D. (1990), ‘Turing’s Test’, in K.A. Said, M. Said, W.H. Newton-Smith, R. Viale and K.V. Wilkes, eds. Modelling the Mind, Oxford, UK: Claredon Press, pp. 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D (1992), Consciousness Explained, Boston, MA.: Little, Brown & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewdney, A. (1992), ‘Turing Test’, Scientific American 266(1), pp. 30–31.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, M. (1990), ‘Intentionality and Computationalism: Minds, Machines, Searle and Hamad’, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 2, pp. 303–319.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, R. (1992), ‘The Quest for the Thinking Computer’, AI Magazine 13(2), pp. 81–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feigenbaum, E.A. (1996), ‘How the “What” Becomes the “How”’, Communications of the ACM 39(5), pp. 97–105.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fetzer, J.H. (1993), ‘The TTT is not the Final Word’, Think 2(1), pp. 34–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fetzer, J.H. (1995), ‘Minds and Machines: Behaviorism, Dualism and Beyond’, Stanford Electronic Humanities Review 4(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, G. (1996), ‘1f Only They Could Think. Should the Turing Test be Blamed for the Ills that Beset Artificial Intelligence’, New Scientist 149(2012), pp. 32–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J.A. (1991), ‘Yin and Yang in the Chinese Room’, in D. Rosenthal, ed., The Nature of the Mind, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, K. and Hayes, P. (1996), ‘The Turing Test is Just as Bad When Inverted’, Psycoloquy 7(43). http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?7.43 .

  • Forsyth, R (1988), ‘The Trouble With AI’, Artificial Intelligence Review 2(1), pp. 67–77.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • French, R. (1990), ‘Subcognition and the Limits of the Turing Test’, Mind 99(393), pp. 53–65.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • French, R. (1995), ‘Refocusing the Debate on the Turing Test: A Response’. Behavior and Philosophy 23, pp. 59–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, R. (1995), ‘The Inverted Turing Test: A Simple (Mindless) Program that Could Pass It’, Psycoloquy 7(39). http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?7.39 .

  • Galatzer-Levy, R.M. (1991), ‘Computer Models and Psychoanalytic Ideas: Epistemological Applications’, Society for Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Bulletin 6(1), pp. 23–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genova, J. (1994a), ‘Response to Anderson and Keith’, Social Epistemology 8(4), pp. 341–343.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Genova, J. (1994b), ‘Turing’s Sexual Guessing Game’, Social Epistemology 8(4), pp. 313–326.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Guccione, S. and Tamburrini, G. (1988), ‘Turing’s Test Revisited’, in Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Vol. 1. Beijing and Shenyang, China, pp. 38–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guillen, M.A. (1983), ‘The Test of Turing’, Psychology Today 17(12), pp. 80–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, K. (1964), ‘The Imitation Game’, Mind 73 pp. 234–245.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, K. (1967), Menraliiy and Machines, New York, NY: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, M. (1987), ‘Turing’s Test and the Ideology of Artificial Intelligence’, Artificial Intelligence Review 1(2), pp. 79–93.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hamad, S. (1989), ‘Minds, Machines and Searle’, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 1(1), pp. 5–25.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hamad, S. (1990), ‘The Symbol Grounding Problem’, Physica D 42, pp. 335–346.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hamad, S. (1991), ‘Other Bodies, Other Minds: A Machine Incarnation of an Old Philosophical Problem’, Minds and Machines 1, pp. 43–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamad, S. (1992), ‘The Turing Test is not a Trick: Turing Indistinguishability is a Scientific Criterion’, SIGART Bulletin 3(4), pp. 9–10.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hamad, S. (1994), ‘Does Mind Piggyback on Robotic and Symbolic Capacity? in H. Morowitz and J. Singer, eds. The Mind, the Brain, and Complex Adaptive Systems, Reading, MA.: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamad, S. (1998), ‘Turing Indistinguishability and the Blind Watchmaker’, in G. Mulhauser, ed. Evolving Consciousness Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, L. (1993), ‘Reaping the Whirlwind: Reply to Harnad’s “Other Bodies, Other Minds” ’, Minds and Machines 3, pp. 219–237.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, L. (1997), ‘Searle’s Chines Box: Debunking the Chinese Room Argument’, Minds and Machines 7, pp. 199–226.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, B. (1998), ‘Turing’s Test’, Muse 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, P. and Ford, K. (1995), ‘Turing Test Considered Harmful’, in Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 1, pp. 972–977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, P., Harnard, S., Perlis, D. and Block, N. (1992), ‘Virtual Symposium on Virtual Mind’, Minds and Machines 3(2), pp. 217–238.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Henley, T.B. (1990), ‘Chauvinism and Science: Another Reply to Shanon’, Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 20(1), pp. 93–95.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges, A. (1983), Alan Turing: The Enigma, New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, D.R. (1982), ‘The Turing Test: A Coffee-House Conversation’, in D. Hofstadter and D. Dennett, eds. The Mind’s I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul, London, UK: Penguin Books, pp. 69–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacquette, D. (1993a), ‘A Turing Test Conversation’, Philosophy 68, pp. 231–233.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Jacquette, D. (1993b), ‘Who’s Afraid of the Turing Test’, Behavior and Philosophy 20, pp. 63–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. (1988), The Computer and the Mind, Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press. Karelis, C. (1986), ‘Reflections on the Turing Test’, Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 16, pp. 161–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kugel, P. (1986), ‘Thinking May Be More Than Computing’, Cognition 22, pp. 137–198.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kugel, P. (1990), ‘Is It Time to Replace Turing’s Test?’, 1990 Workshop Artificial Intelligence: Emer- ging Science or Dying Art Form. Sponsored by SUNY Binghamton’s Program in Philosophy and Computer and Systems Sciences and AAAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lassegue, J. (1988), ‘What Kind of Turing Test did Turing Have in Mind?’, Tekhnema 3, pp. 37–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, J. (1989), ‘Shanon on the Turing Test’, Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 19(2), pp. 257–259.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, J. (1992), The Light Bulb and the Turing-Tested Machine’, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 22, pp. 25–39.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, J. (1995), ‘On Turing’s Turing Test and Why the Matter Matters’, Synthese 105, pp. 59–69.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Loebner, H.G (1994), ‘In Response’, Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery 37, pp. 79–82.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, J. (1996), ‘Minds, Machines and Gödel’, Philosophy 36, pp. 112–127.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, J. (1996), ‘Minds, Machines and Gödel: A Retrospect’, in P. Millican and A. Clark, eds. Machines and Mind, Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maloney, J. (1987), ‘The Right Stuff’, Synthese 70, pp. 349–372.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Marinoff, L. (1995), ‘Has Turing Slain the Jabberwock?’, Informatica 19(4), pp. 513–526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauldin, M. (1994), ‘Chatterbots, Tinymuds and the Turing Test: Entering the Loebner Prize Com petition’, in Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 1, Seattle, WA, pp. 16–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mays, W. (1952), ‘Can Machines Think?’, Philosophy 27, pp. 148–162.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mcllvenny, P. (1993), ‘Constructing Societies and Social Machines: Stepping out of the Turing Test Discourse’, Journal of Intelligent Systems 2(2–4), pp. 2–4.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Michie, D. (1990), ‘The Superarticulacy Phenomenon in the Context of Software Manufacture’, in D. Partridge and Y. Wilks, eds.: The Foundations of Artificial Intelligence, Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press, pp. 411–439.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Michie, D. (1994), ‘Consciousness as an Engineering Issue, Part 1’. Journal of Consciousness Studies 1(2), pp. 52–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michie, D. (1995), ‘Consciousness as an Engineering Issue, Part 2’, Journal of Consciousness Studies 2(1), pp. 182–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michie, D. (1996), ‘Turing’s Test and Conscious Thought’ in P. Millican and A. Clark, eds. Machines and Thought: The Legacy of Alan Turing, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 27–51. Originally printed in Artificial Intelligence 60, pp. 27–51, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar, P.H. (1973), ‘On the Point of the Imitation Game’, Mind 82, pp. 595–597.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Minsky, M. (1985), ‘Communication with Alien Intelligence’, in E. Regis, ed. Extraterrestrials: Science and Alien Intelligence, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon, Y., Naas, C., Morkes, J., Kim, E.-Y. and Fogg, B. (1994), ‘Computers are Social Actors’, in Proceedings of the CHI Conference, Boston, MA, pp. 72–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moor, J.H. (1976), An Analysis of the Turing Test’, Philosophical Studies 30, pp. 249–257.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Moor, J.H. (1978), ‘Explaining Computer Behavior’, Philosophical Studies 34, pp. 325–327.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Narayanan, A. (1996), ‘The Intentional Stance and the Imitation Game’, in P. Millican and A. Clark,eds. Machines and Thought: The Legacy of Alan Turing, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 63–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, H. (1990), ‘Turing on the Turing Test’, in W. Karwowski and M. Rahimi, eds. Ergonomics of Hybrid Automated Systems II, Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinksy, L. (1951), ‘Do Machines Think About Thinking’, Mind 60(239), pp. 397–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Platt, C. (1995), ‘What’s It Mean To Be Human, Anyway?’, Wired.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purtill, R.L. (1971), ‘Beating the Imitation Game’, Mind 80, 290–294.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rankin, T. (1987), The Turing Paradigm: A Critical Assessment’, Dialogue 29, pp. 50–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reader, A. (1969), ‘Steps Toward Genuine Artificial Intelligence’, Acta Psychologica 29(3), pp. 279–289.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rey, G. (1986), ‘What’s Really Going on in the Chinese Room?’, Philosophical Studies 50, pp. 196–285.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, R. (1982), ‘Turing Tests for Intelligence: Ned Block’s Defense of Psychologism’, Philosophical Studies 41, pp. 421–426.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, L. (1990), ‘Searle’s Extension of the Chinese Room to Connectionist Machines’, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 2, pp. 185–187.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, G. (1973), ‘In Defence of Turing’, Mind 82, pp. 592–594.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Saygin, A.P. (1999), ‘Turing Test and Conversation’, Master’s thesis, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey. Technical Report BU-CEIS-9911.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweizer, P. (1998), ‘The Truly Total Turing Test’, Minds and Machines 8, pp. 263–272.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J.R. (1980), ‘Minds, Brains and Programs’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3, pp. 417–424.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J.R. (1990), ‘Is the Brain’s Mind a Computer Program?’, Scientific American 3(262), pp.26–31.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Shanon, B. (1989), ‘A Simple Comment Regarding the Turing Test’, Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 19(2), pp. 249–256.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Shanon, B. (1991), ‘Chauvinism: A Misdirected Accusation’, Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 21(3), pp. 369–371.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, R. and Conrath, D. (1993), ‘Evaluating Expert Systems: A Review of Applicable Choices’, Artificial Intelligence Review 7(2), pp. 77–91.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Shieber, S.M. (1994), ‘Lessons from a Restricted Turing Test’, Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery 37, pp. 70–78.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stalker, D. (1978), ‘Why Machines Can’t Think: A Reply to James Moor’, Philosophical Studies 34, pp. 317–320.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, J.G. (1976), ‘On the Imitation Game’, Philosophia 6, pp. 131–133.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Turing, A. (1950), ‘Computing Machinery and Intelligence’, Mind 59(236), pp. 433–460.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Turing, A. (1969), ‘Intelligent Machinery’, in D.M.B. Meltzer ed. Machine Intelligence 5, Edinburgh University Press, pp. 3–23. Originally, a National Physics Laboratory Report, 1948.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, R.S. (1997), ‘The Lying Game’, Wired.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watt, S. (1996), ‘Naive Psychology and the Inverted Turing Test’, Psycoloquy 7(14)http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psydnewpsy?7.14

  • Weizenbaum, J. (1996), ’ELIZA—A Computer Program for the Study of Natural Language Commu-nication Between Men and Machines’, Communications of the ACM 9, pp. 36–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weizenbaum, J. (1976), Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgement to Calculation, San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whalen, T. (1995), ‘How I Lost the Contest and Re-Evaluated Humanity’, http://debra.dgbt.doc.ca/chatlstory95.html

  • Whitby, B. (1996), ‘The Turing Test: AI’s Biggest Blind Alley?’, in P. Millican and A. Clarke, eds. Machines and Thought: The Legacy of Alan Turing, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 53–63.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Saygin, A.P., Cicekli, I., Akman, V. (2003). Turing Test: 50 Years Later. In: Moor, J.H. (eds) The Turing Test. Studies in Cognitive Systems, vol 30. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0105-2_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0105-2_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-1205-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0105-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive