Deception-detection and machine intelligence in practical Turing tests

Deception-detection is the crux of Turing’s experiment to examine machine thinking conveyed through a capacity to respond with sustained and satisfactory answers to unrestricted questions put by a human interrogator. However, in 60 years to the month since the publication of Computing Machinery and Intelligence little agreement exists for a canonical format for Turing’s textual game of imitation, deception and machine intelligence. This research raises from the trapped mine of philosophical claims, counter-claims and rebuttals Turing’s own distinct five minutes question-answer imitation game, which he envisioned practicalised in two different ways: a) A two-participant, interrogator-witness viva voce, b) A three-participant, comparison of a machine with a human both questioned simultaneously by a human interrogator. Using Loebner’s 18th Prize for Artificial Intelligence contest, and Colby et al.’s 1972 transcript analysis paradigm, this research practicalised Turing’s imitation game with over 400 human participants and 13 machines across three original experiments. Results show that, at the current state of technology, a deception rate of 8.33% was achieved by machines in 60 human-machine simultaneous comparison tests. Results also show more than 1 in 3 Reviewers succumbed to hidden interlocutor misidentification after reading transcripts from experiment 2. Deception-detection is essential to uncover the increasing number of malfeasant programmes, such as CyberLover, developed to steal identity and financially defraud users in chatrooms across the Internet. Practicalising Turing’s two tests can assist in understanding natural dialogue and mitigate the risk from cybercrime.

Control without deception

Lying to participants offers an experimenter the enticing prospect of making “others' behaviour” a controlled variable, but is eschewed by experimental economists because it may pollute the pool of subjects. This paper proposes and implements a new experimental design, the Conditional Information Lottery, which offers all the benefits of deception without actually deceiving anyone. The design should be suitable for most economics experiments, and works by a modification of an already standard device, the Random Lottery incentive system. The deceptive scenarios of designs which use deceit are replaced with fictitious scenarios, each of which, from a subject's viewpoint, has a chance of being true. The design is implemented in a sequential play public good experiment prompted by Weimann's (1994) result, from a deceptive design, that subjects are more sensitive to freeriding than cooperation on the part of others. The experiment provides similar results to Weimann's, in that subjects are at least as cooperative when uninformed about others' behaviour as they are if reacting to high contributions. No deception is used and the data cohere well both internally and with other public goods experiments. In addition, simultaneous play is found to be more efficient than sequential play, and subjects contribute less at the end of a sequence than at the start. The results suggest pronounced elements of overconfidence, egoism and (biased) reciprocity in behaviour, which may explain decay in contributions in repeated play designs. The experiment shows there is a workable alternative to deception.

Euphemism: Sweet Talking or Deception?

The aim of this paper is to shed light on euphemism in two different senses: sweet talking and deception. I shall treat euphemism from two different perspectives: the usual use of euphemism, sweet talking, in which it is used to maintain one's face and the orthophemistic sense, deception, where 'torture' is referred to as "enhanced interrogation techniques". I shall analyze examples, taken from religious, cultural, political backgrounds, on each case. Moreover, I shall talk about taboo since it is usually associated with euphemism. I shall talk about the referential (semantic) and expletive (pragmatic) aspects of swearing expressions. In this essay, I shall show that euphemism can be used in two different senses: sweet talking and deception.

The 3D Attenuation Structure of Deception Island (Antarctica)

Peer reviewed

How I Got Pregnant: Should Having a Child Justify a Partner’s ‘Deception’?

Réponse à - Travail créatif / Response to - Creative work

How I Got Pregnant: Should Having a Child Justify a Partner’s ‘Deception’?

Réponse à - Travail créatif / Response to - Creative work

The Goss-Udderzook tragedy : being a history of a strange case of deception and murder, including the great life insurance case, and the trial of William E. Udderzook for the murder of W. S. Goss.

Spine title: Trial of Udderzook.

Keynes at Harvard; economic deception as a political credo.

Mode of access: Internet.

Vichy; two years of deception,

"First printing."