Understanding the Meaning of Understanding
Daniele Funaro

TL;DR
This paper explores the challenge of determining whether a machine truly understands an abstract concept without direct testing, focusing on the metaphysical implications and proposing a conceptual framework.
Contribution
It introduces a novel approach to assess machine understanding of concepts indirectly, emphasizing the importance of equivalence classes and metaphysical considerations.
Findings
Proposes a framework for understanding machine comprehension without direct questions
Highlights metaphysical issues in defining understanding
Suggests equivalence classes as a means to isolate meaning
Abstract
Can we train a machine to detect if another machine has understood a concept? In principle, this is possible by conducting tests on the subject of that concept. However we want this procedure to be done by avoiding direct questions. In other words, we would like to isolate the absolute meaning of an abstract idea by putting it into a class of equivalence, hence without adopting straight definitions or showing how this idea "works" in practice. We discuss the metaphysical implications hidden in the above question, with the aim of providing a plausible reference framework.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsComputability, Logic, AI Algorithms · Evolutionary Algorithms and Applications · Artificial Intelligence in Games
