The question is very basic: references to books ( or e-books or web published books ) or to state of art papers about current development trends for a strong-AI ?

Some points about this question (please, read them before close-vote):

  • It seems this site allows ask for references, see help center "reference requests for papers or text books" (several other stack exchange sites doesn't allows). Better do not include opinions about the books, just refer the book with a brief description.

  • Even when it is a very basic question, I've not found it already in this site (not a duplicate ?).

  • It is suppressing the small amount of books about the subject, after discard the ones related to applied AI, that is, discard Norvig book and similar, discard neural net ones (in all its variants, if target is an applied AI), ... . Discard also AGI proceedings, that contains papers that focus in very concrete aspects. Wikipedia describes some active investigation lines about AGI (cognitive, neuroscience, ...) but can not considered a educational/introductory resource.

  • Remark the point about development: not interested on philosophical questions about the risks of AI, its morality, ... if they are not related to its development. Development doesn't excludes mathematical foundation about it.

By example, if I look by example at this list "https://bigthink.com/mike-colagrossi/the-10-best-books-on-ai", the final candidates list became empty.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'm not sure exactly what kind of resource you are after. The best resources we have on development right now are probably the AGI proceedings. This is a new area, and frankly it's considered boarderline/fringe science by most of the AI research community. Are you after philosophical readings on whether/how one might be built? Bostrom might be a good place to start in that case. $\endgroup$ – John Doucette Aug 5 '18 at 14:20
  • $\begingroup$ @JohnDoucette: we could think about a book explaining in a organized way the areas and main theories that proceedings works. Mainly from technical point, as Norvig does in AI. No ethicals if they are not related to the development $\endgroup$ – pasaba por aqui Aug 5 '18 at 14:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think this is very unlikely to exist. The first AGI conference was held only a few years ago, and, like I said, I don't think anything much has come of it yet. New fields usually need at least a decade before there's likely to be a decent graduate-level textbook, let alone something like Norvig. $\endgroup$ – John Doucette Aug 5 '18 at 14:27
  • $\begingroup$ @JohnDoucette: Thanks for your comment. Book or web content or presentation , even a good state of art $\endgroup$ – pasaba por aqui Aug 5 '18 at 14:29
  • $\begingroup$ An upraising super-human-AI isn't equal to robots, but it is more the opposite. Singularity is near if a neoluddite movement will try stop any kind of technological advancement to protect mankind of the future. It is easy to monitor and shape this development to Strong AI, because we only need to ask how powerful the luddite movement is. A luddite is an entity, who argues against machines and against artificial intelligence. $\endgroup$ – Manuel Rodriguez Aug 6 '18 at 14:25

Although I think my comment remains valid (there's not really a good textbook yet), there are more resources than I expected for this topic, so I'll list them as an answer here:

  1. MIT offers a course in this. The slides and lecture videos are up online. It looks fairly speculative to me, and perhaps more application-focused than what was asked for.
  2. There is actually a textbook. It's a bit out of date (from 2008), and published as a Springer-Verlag monograph (which tends to have fairly low editorial standards). This one is also an anthology, with each chapter written by a different author. It's probably not suitable as an undergraduate level book, but it does seem to contain something like the information that's wanted.

You may blindly go ahead with this book by Goodfellow and Yoshua Bengio.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Deep learning is not strong-AI $\endgroup$ – pasaba por aqui Aug 10 '18 at 9:14

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.