Source URL: https://simonwillison.net/2024/Oct/12/michael-wooldridge/#atom-everything
Source: Simon Willison’s Weblog
Title: Quoting Michael Wooldridge
Feedly Summary: Carl Hewitt recently remarked that the question what is an agent? is embarrassing for the agent-based computing community in just the same way that the question what is intelligence? is embarrassing for the mainstream AI community. The problem is that although the term is widely used, by many people working in closely related areas, it defies attempts to produce a single universally accepted definition. This need not necessarily be a problem: after all, if many people are successfully developing interesting and useful applications, then it hardly matters that they do not agree on potentially trivial terminological details. However, there is also the danger that unless the issue is discussed, ‘agent’ might become a ‘noise’ term, subject to both abuse and misuse, to the potential confusion of the research community.
— Michael Wooldridge, in 1994, Intelligent Agents: Theory and Practice
Tags: ai
AI Summary and Description: Yes
Summary: The text highlights the ambiguity surrounding the definition of “agent” in the context of agent-based computing, drawing a parallel to the broader challenges faced in defining “intelligence” within the AI community. This discussion is particularly pertinent for professionals in AI, as a failure to clarify such fundamental concepts can lead to miscommunication and misunderstandings in research and application development.
Detailed Description: The commentary reflects on the complex nature of terminological definitions within the fields of AI and agent-based computing. Key points include:
– **Ambiguity of Terms**: The lack of a universally accepted definition for the term ‘agent’ poses challenges for the agent-based computing community. This is similar to the historical difficulties faced in defining ‘intelligence’ across the AI landscape.
– **Practical Applications**: While the absence of a precise definition may not impede the development of useful applications, it raises concerns about the clarity and communication within the research community.
– **Potential Risks**: The text warns that the term ‘agent’ might become overused or misused without proper discourse surrounding its definition, which could lead to confusion among researchers and developers.
– **Call for Discussion**: Emphasizing the importance of dialogue, the message advocates for engaging with such foundational questions to prevent the term from devolving into a mere buzzword.
– **Historical Context**: The reference to Michael Wooldridge in a 1994 context brings a historical perspective to the ongoing discussions in AI, underscoring that these issues have long been recognized yet remain unresolved.
Overall, this text serves as a reminder for AI professionals to prioritize clarity in terminology to facilitate meaningful collaboration and innovation within the rapidly evolving field.