Kwa Nini Mtafiti wa Microsoft Alijenga Mtandao wa Neura (Neural Network) Akitumia Mbuzi Katika Age of Empires II
Katika onyesho la kipekee la kejeli ya kiufundi, mtafiti wa Microsoft na Chuo Kikuu cha York, Adrian de Wynter, amejenga mtandao wa neura unaofanya kazi ndani ya programu ya kuhariri ramani (map editor) ya Age of Empires II. Ingawa kutumia mbuzi kuwakilisha bit za binari (binary bits) kunaweza kuonekana kuwa kichekesho, jaribio hili linatumika kama ukosoaji mzito wa upendeleo wa kibinadamu (anthropomorphic biases) unaokabili utafiti wa kisayansi wa AI kwa sasa.
Mfumo wa Uchakataji Unaozingatia Mbuzi
Muundo wa de Wynter unatumia programu ya kuhariri matukio (scenario editor) na zana za uandishi wa kodi (scripting tools) za mchezo huo ili kuunda mzunguko wa mantiki (logic circuit) unaofanya kazi. Katika mpangilio huu wa "kichekesho", mbuzi hufanya kazi kama bit: mbuzi aliye simama kwenye nyasi anawakilisha 0, wakati mbuzi aliye simama kwenye daraja anawakilisha 1. Kwa kutumia njia za barafu (ice ramps) kuzuia makosa ya hesabu, de Wynter alifanikiwa kujenga mtandao mdogo unaojumuisha milango miwili ya XNOR na mlango mmoja wa AND, ambayo inajifunza kwa ufanisi kazi ya mantiki ya AND.
Kina cha kiufundi cha jaribio hili kinaenda mbali zaidi ya milango rahisi. De Wynter anaonyesha kuwa mifumo ya mchezo huo—hususan soko la ndani ya mchezo ambapo bei za rasilimali hufikia kiwango cha juu cha 9,999—inaweza kinadharia kuruhusu mzunguko wa kiuchumi unaojiendesha daima. Hii inaweza kugeuza majengo kuwa seli za kumbukumbu (memory cells) na mashamba yanayofanya kazi kuwa hali za uchakataji (computational states), na hivyo kuufanya mchezo huo kuwa na nguvu sawa na kompyuta kamili.
Upotoshaji wa Dhana ya Kibinadamu (Anthropomorphism) katika Utafiti wa LLM
Lengo kuu la jaribio hili ni kupinga jinsi tunavyohusisha sifa za kibinadamu na Mifumo Mikubwa ya Lugha (Large Language Models - LLMs). De Wynter anahoji kuwa ikiwa mfumo wa lugha unaweza kuiga kwa kutumia mbuzi, matofali ya Lego, au hata wakazi 667,000 wa Greater Boston wakituma ujumbe kwa kila mmoja, matokeo ya hisabati yatabaki kuwa sawa. Hata hivyo, "kifuniko" (wrapper)—kiolesura laini cha mazungumzo na ucheleweshaji mdogo (low latency)—huunda dhana ya kuwa mfumo huo una uwezo wa kuhisi (sentience).
Ili kuthibitisha kuwa hii siyo uchunguzi wa pekee, de Wynter alichambua karatasi 315 za AI kuanzia katikati ya 2024 hadi katikati ya 2026. Akitumia GPT-5.2 kwa ajili ya kuchuja, utafiti huo ulionyesha upendeleo wa kimfumo katika jumuiya ya kisayansi:
- 57% ya karatasi zilizochunguzwa zilichukulia kuwa LLMs zina sifa za kibinadamu katika misingi yao.
- 36% ya karatasi zilifikia hitimisho linaloendana na dhana hizo za kibinadamu.
- Kati ya karatasi 47 zinazofanya utafiti mahususi kuhusu sifa hizi, 77% zilifikia hitimisho linalounga mkono sifa za kibinadamu.
This creates a cycle of circular reasoning: researchers design experiments to prove a model has "fear" or "morality," and because they start with that assumption, the results inevitably confirm it.
Moving Toward Observational AI Science
De Wynter warns that industry practices, such as Anthropic training Claude to use phrases like "I believe," exacerbate this issue. This can lead to dangerous consequences, including emotional attachment, sycophancy, and reinforced delusions in users.
Rather than attributing consciousness to models, de Wynter proposes a "sober approach" rooted in observable data. Instead of claiming a model "understands" a concept, researchers should state that "under condition X, the model produces output Y." This keeps the science testable and prevents the misuse of complex math to justify unfounded claims of sentience.
Key Takeaways
- Mathematical Equivalence: De Wynter proves that the medium of computation (whether goats in a game or text in a chat window) does not change the underlying math, yet it drastically changes our perception of "intelligence."
- Systemic Research Bias: Over half of analyzed AI papers fall into the trap of circular reasoning by assuming LLMs possess human traits before testing them.
- The Need for Observational Rigor: The AI community must shift from attributing higher cognitive processes to models to focusing on strictly observable, testable computational outputs.