Conclusion Research into artificial intelligence will fail to produce truly intelligent machines unless the focus of the discipline is radically changed. ████████ ███ ████ ████ ██ ████████ ███████ ██ ██████████ █████████████ ███████████████ ███ ███ ███████ █████ ██ █████████████ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ █████ █████████ ████ ███████ ███████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████ ████████████ ██ █ █████ █████ █████ ██ ███ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████████ ███ █████ ████████████ ██████████
If scientists keep focusing only on making artificial intelligence really good at solving problems, they won't be able to create truly smart machines. Right now, scientists are focusing solely on computational ability and ignoring other abilities. A machine that can only compute but does nothing else won't be truly intelligent, just like a person with no emotions wouldn't be fully smart.
The argument’s main conclusion is that if the focus of artificial intelligence research is not broadened beyond improving machines' computational ability, then such research will not produce truly intelligent machines.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████ ██████████ ██████ ███ ██████
The current focus ██ ████████ ████ ██████████ ████████████ ████ ███████ ███████ ██ ████ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████ ████████████ ████ █ ██████ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ████████ ███ █████ ████████████ ██████████
This is a premise. It supports the conclusion by highlighting the limitations of focusing only on computational ability in AI research. It suggests that ignoring other skills will result in devices as limited as a person lacking emotions, underscoring the need for broader focus.
If the current █████ ██ ████████ ████ ██████████ ████████████ ██ ███ █████████ ████████ ████ ████████ ████ ███ ██ ████ ██ ███████ ████████ ███████ ██ ████ █████████████
This captures the argument’s main conclusion. It paraphrases its central point: without a significant shift in the current focus of artificial intelligence research, which is too narrowly centered on computational ability, researchers will not create truly intelligent machines.
Despite progress in ████████ ████████ ██ █████ █████████████ ███████████████ ███████ ████████ ████ ██████████ ████████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ███ ███████████
The stimulus doesn't make this argument. It only states that current research has not created true intelligence but does not discuss the objective of AI research. While the author might agree with this goal, the author doesn’t make this claim in the stimulus.
The capacity to ███████ ████████████ █████████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ██ █████ ██ █████████ ███ ████ ████████████ ██ ██ █████████████ ███████████████
The stimulus doesn’t make this claim. It states that truly intelligent machines need more than computational ability, like humans need more than cognitive responses, but it doesn’t compare their importance or argue that true machine intelligence requires noncognitive responses.
If a machine ██ ███ ███████ ██ █████████ █████████ ████████████ ██████████ ████ ██ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ █████ ████████████
The stimulus does not make this claim. The stimulus states that truly intelligent machines need more than computational ability, like humans need more than cognitive responses, but the stimulus does not argue that true machine intelligence requires noncognitive responses.
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnostic