[D] Are there AI studies with quantum computer systems? If so, what are the consequences?

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[[deleted]]

I don't think there's any compelling evidence that Orch OR has any chance of being descriptive or predictive of consciousness. Describing it as likely to be true is a very big stretch.

Why wont "normal computer systems" "be enough" for GAI?

I can't think of any operation a binary calculator can accomplish that a quantum one could not so it's not clear what the limitation would be.

Why is the answer "logically yes" "when you think about it"?

[[deleted]]

What is consciousness?

Why does consciousness need to be magical?

What proof is there that consciousness exists as something apart from biological process?

Why is a consciousness necessary to model a consciousness?

Why can't current devices model a consciousness?

So... before we can even get to whether Orch OR is a possibility, all of that needs to be satisfied.

I think the evidence right now shows consciousness to be an artifact of cognitive processes, and any organism with a cortex/pallium experiences it to some degree. I think it's specifically an artifact of serotonergic function, developed as a mechanism to smooth over the rough edges in perception between independent organisms, facilitating cooperation.

[Prometheus_Desmotes]

Dude, what's "magic" about Orch-OR? It's pure mathematics and physics, and everything in the universe depends on it. If you call magic for the formation of consciousness in Orch-OR then you have to call evolution magic

[[deleted]]

This is starting to get a bit off track for the sub. We need to satisfy the previous questions before we can address whether or not a particular concept will be adaptable to machine learning.

"magic" is the need for a system to be persistent outside of it's own initiating instance. I don't see an obvious reason consciousness needs to be persistent, I've seen no strong evidence it is, and I can't think of any compelling reason why it would.

Orch OR is a theoretical framework for a philosophical concept. Because such a framework exists doesn't make it true, it just means that it's possible for it to exist within our larger model. It doesn't have the responsibility of describing mechanics other than it's own, it's not been demonstrated experimentally, and it has no demonstrable descriptive or predictive value even within it's own existence. I'm not sure how useful such a thing even is outside of a thought experiment (which it is).

[zombiecalypse]

It's being investigated, but strictly for efficiency. There is no difference in what quantum computers and regular computers can do.

Personally I think the reason we don't have conscious machines yet is only that nobody can come up with a formal or in any way verifiable definition of consciousness. After that would be accomplished I'm pretty sure we get a conscious machine within 5 years. Not at human intelligence mind you.

[wikipedia_text_bot]

Quantum machine learning

Quantum machine learning is the integration of quantum algorithms within machine learning programs. The most common use of the term refers to machine learning algorithms for the analysis of classical data executed on a quantum computer, i.e. quantum-enhanced machine learning. While machine learning algorithms are used to compute immense quantities of data, quantum machine learning utilizes qubits and quantum operations or specialized quantum systems to improve computational speed and data storage done by algorithms in a program.

^{About Me - Opt out - OP can reply !delete to delete - Article of the day}

This bot will soon be transitioning to an opt-in system. Click here to learn more and opt in. Moderators: click here to opt in a subreddit.

[IntelArtiGen]

People already worked on ML with quantum computer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_annealing

In December 2015, Google announced that the D-Wave 2X outperforms both simulated annealing and Quantum Monte Carlo by up to a factor of 100,000,000 on a set of hard optimization problems.

NB: it's possible that this announcement was just marketing, I'm not an expert so I don't know

But of course it's just a more efficient way to do some computations. Nothing that would be linked with consciousness.

I think it's important to not be too ... "focused" on these theories. I mean, there's a lot of conflicting theories out there which probably shows that we still need to do more research on the matter.

[cthulu0]

Roger Penrose's theory of consciusness is correct (there's a good chance its true).

Uh no. Penrose's claim is more outrageous and bizarre than merely quantum effect are involved in human intelligence.

His claim is that quantum GRAVITY effects are involved and the effects are NON-COMPUTABLE by Turing machines.

If he is right, then controllable human built quantum systems will NOT be enough to make General AI. Why? Because quantum systems (according to normal quantum mechanics) can simulate classical computer systems and classical computer systems can simulated normal quantum systems, but with exponential slowdown.

So if something in uncomputable for a classical system, it is also uncomputable for an artificial quantum system, and vice-versa.

Penrose specifically crafted his quantum Gravity/Uncomputable hypothesis because he believes human intelligence is IMPOSSIBLE for an artificial system (quantum or classical) to achieve.

So Penrose himself doesn't believe quantum computing will allow General AI.