人工知能はそもそも不穏である | AI Is Disquieting by Nature [J/E]

第14回AI美芸研
（人工知能美学芸術シンポジウム04）
AI美学と多神教
人工知能美学芸術研究会
沖縄科学技術大学院大学
2018年1月6日（土）
OIST 講堂

The 14th AI Art & Aesthetics Research Meeting
（Artificial Intelligence Art and Aesthetics Symposium 04）
AI Aesthetics and the Polytheism
Artificial Intelligence Art and Aesthetics Research Groop (AIAARG)
Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST)
January 6 (Sat), 2018
OIST Auditorium

第15回AI美芸研
人工意識／人工生命
2018年1月7日（日）
OIST 講堂

Artificial Consciousness / Artificial Life
January 7 (Sun), 2018
OIST Auditorium

第16回AI美芸研
AI美学と機械
2018年1月8日（月祝）
OIST 講堂

AI Aesthetics and the Machinery
January 8 (Mon/Holi), 2018
OIST Auditorium

• 1983-1989 acrylic painting
• 1990-1996 Silly CG
• 1997-2004 Method Painting
• 2005- serious painting, New-Method, etc

人工知能はそもそも不穏である
中ザワヒデキ
美術家／AI美芸研発起人代表

AI Is Disquieting by Nature
Hideki Nakazawa
Artist, Founder and Representative of AIARG

人工知能はそもそも不穏である｜AI Is Disquieting by Nature｜1/9
●真のAIはまだ実現していない。現時点のAIは人間の為の従順な道具に過ぎない。
●真のAIの実現は唯物論の勝利＝世の中に神秘は無い＝人間もただの機械
Like "Artificial Life" or "Artificial Consciousness," "Artificial
Intelligence" is disquieting by nature, not simply a passive product of
human creation. Imagine that machines made of iron, or some other
material, could produce intelligence — the ability to comprehend,
understand, and profit from experience — entirely autonomously. Yes,
this is artificial intelligence (AI) in its true meaning. The realization of this
will be the triumph of materialism, revealing a world that has neither
mystery nor God, in which humans are merely machines made of
proteins and other substances. But today, in 2017, so-called artificial
intelligence is a kind of law-abiding, dependent and passive computer
program which humans use as an obedient tool for humans' sake, being
far from the original meaning of the word.

The same could be said of AI art. Art that is allegedly produced by
AI is, in reality, nothing but human art, made with an obedient machine
program. In other words, today's AI art is a product of human aesthetics.
But, is this true AI art? No. Such an occupation that makes artistic
products for somebody else's needs is called illustration or commercial
art, which is strictly separated from fine art. True AI Art must be AI's fine
art; it must be produced by machines autonomously, independently and
actively for machines’ own sake with machines’ own aesthetics. This is
disquieting by nature, certainly no passive product of human creation
either.
●真のAI芸術もまだ実現していない。現時点のAI芸術は人間の芸術に過ぎない。
●真のAI芸術は機械が自身の為に自身の美学を以て自律的に作られたものの筈。

The "Artificial Intelligence Art and Aesthetics Exhibition" being held at
Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (OIST) in
Okinawa, Japan until January 8, 2018 is focusing on this concept of True AI Art.
However, to date, art in this category does not yet exist. The exhibition shows
four categories as follows: "[I] Human Art / Human Aesthetics," "[II] Human
Art / Machine Aesthetics," "[III] Machine Art / Human Aesthetics," "[IV]
Machine Art / Machine Aesthetics." You will find that category [I] contains
normal human art with human aesthetics since the Renaissance. Category
[IV] is True AI Art — although it has not yet been realized, this is what we, the
curators of the exhibition, want to see. Art that has allegedly been produced
by AI today falls into category [III], while category [II] is a kind of 20th century
systemic art like minimalism, serial music and visual poetry. The exhibition at
OIST contains many artworks from category [II] as well as [III].
●「人工知能美学芸術展」は、真のAI芸術に照準している。
●それはⅠⅡⅢⅣ分類の「Ⅳ：機械美学／機械芸術」だ。まだ実現していない。

The category [II], "Human Art / Machine Aesthetics" can be
considered to have developed from the Eiffel Tower in 1889; the tower’s
construction was opposed by many famous artists, including William
Adolphe Bouguereau, a painter, and Guy de Maupassant, a novelist,
because they viewed the plain appearance of machine-calculated design
as hideous, denying human aesthetics. As the Eiffel Tower looks
beautiful to most of us today, we can learn that aesthetics can be
changed or even generated within the human world. Therefore, can
aesthetics be generated automatically within the machine world
without any pre-programming of evaluation function by humans? This
question is the key concept of the exhibition: "Will AI have its own
aesthetic autonomy?"
●「Ⅱ：機械美学／人間芸術」（エッフェル塔）は、美学の変化や生成を示唆。
●評価関数なしに機械界に美学が生じるか？人工知能に美意識は芽生えるか？

At this point, we must define art and aesthetics. In the words of Plato,
"the true, the good, and the beautiful," are all things that have value in
themselves. For instance, beauty has value in its own right, not because it
serves some other purpose. In the same way, some chimpanzees produce
drawings for the sheer pleasure of drawing if they are given drawing materials.
The exhibition includes drawings by five chimpanzees and a bonobo from the
Primate Research Institute, Kyoto University — these exhibits belong to the
category [IV], "Machine Art / Machine Aesthetics." If they produced drawings
in return for bananas, we, the curators, did not include them in the exhibition
because such rewards are examples of art serving another purpose. We are
interested in the idea of art that has value in itself, in other words, "Art for
Art's sake”. But how can this emerge in the machine world?
●真善美はそれ自体で価値を持つ。他の目的に奉仕しない。芸術の為の芸術。
●チンパンジーはバナナ（報酬）の為でなく絵を描く。しかしどうやって、機械界に？

Two steps are needed, I think. Firstly, AI must generate its own
goals. Secondly, methods which are used to achieve the main goal, ‘sub-
goals,’ must become main goals themselves.
●「芸術の為の芸術」が発生する為の第1段：AIが自身の目標を生成する。
●「芸術の為の芸術」が発生する為の第2段：方法の目的化＝副目標の主目標化

The first step can be seen in the exhibit by Kenji Doya and the
Smartphone Robot Development Team entitled "Can Robots Find Their Own
Goals?". Doya is a professor from OIST's Neural Computation Unit who
researches this topic. His experiment, in brief, is to let many robots, which are
smartphones with wheels, move freely, preparing their own place to charge
and exchanging programs by scanning each other’s QR codes. Here, to charge
is to ‘eat’ whilst to exchange programs is to ‘have sex and reproduce’. Robots
who do not manage to charge and reproduce will stop, or ‘die’, meaning that
their programs, or ‘genes’, will evolve by a process of survival of the fittest.
The result of the experiment has already convinced Professor Doya that
robots can find their own goals. Yes, goals can be generated automatically in
the machine world without any pre-programming of aesthetic by humans.
●「芸術の為の芸術」が発生する為の第1段：AIが自身の目標を生成する。
●銅谷賢治「ロボットは自分の目標を見つけられる」……適者生存、進化

The second step is already being explored by AI researchers.
Suppose the main goal is to breed. To have sex is a method to breed,
which can be seen as a sub-goal. To attract a partner is a method to
have sex, which can be seen as a sub-sub-goal. To be beautiful is a
method to attract a partner, which can be seen as a sub-sub-sub-goal.
Not all of the main and sub-goals in the hierarchy need to be recognized
by each individual in the evolutional story. To have sex is a goal for each
individual whether they wish to breed or not; this situation created the
need for condoms. Thus, when methods to achieve the main goal
become important goals themselves, new main goals can emerge. To
have sex has value in itself, as does beauty. If sex for sex's sake can be
generated, so can art for art's sake.
●「芸術の為の芸術」が発生する為の第2段：方法の目的化＝副目標の主目標化
●山川宏「強化学習の本質は価値予測」「主目標の為に副目標が自動生成される」

Therefore, by combining these two steps to create goals automatically
in the machine world, art for art's sake can be created. The next question will
be whether or not the art for art's sake generated in the machine world will
be similar to the Art for Art's sake in the human world. This may or may not
be the case. Deeply learned AI like art-historian will produce similar one,
whilst outsider type will produce different one. Regardless, if whatever is
created is created purely for its own sake, it cannot be called anything but art.
But will it be tremendously stimulating or painfully boring for humans?
Probably both. Even in human art, we are questioning the definition of
aesthetics, since beauty cannot be quantified. I think that future AI artists,
once they have achieved their own aesthetics, will precede us and bring new
hints to this question. Yes, both art and aesthetics will be derived by AI
without humans in the future.
●「芸術の為の芸術」の発生の次は：機械界のそれと人間界のそれとの異同…天才
型（アール・ブリュット）も秀才型（美術史家）も有り得る／AI駆動美学芸術へ

「機械美学／機械芸術」に至る道程
人間が目標を与えれば、人工知能プログラムはよく動く。ブランコロボット
はわずか十数分で人間以上の漕ぎ方を編み出すし、AI囲碁同士の対戦は人間
の理解を超えた神の闘いとなる。だから人間が人間の美学を自明的な目標と
して与えれば、人工知能は芸術を作る。これが「人間美学／機械芸術」だ。
ところが人間の美学は自明ではなく、たとえば機械計算でできたエッフェル
塔は芸術家から美的でないと当初非難された。こうした「機械美学／人間芸
術」は、芸術自体を目標化した「芸術の為の芸術」に行き着く。さて今日、
人工知能は自分の目標を見つけられない。しかしこの前提が崩れれば、人工
知能は機械美学を目標とした芸術を作り得る。これが「芸術の為の芸術」に
行き着けば、人間の理解を超えた「機械美学／機械芸術」が出現する。

The Route to
“Machine Aesthetics / Machine Art”
If human gives a goal, artificial intelligence program works well. The
swing robot creates more than human beings in just over a dozen
minutes and the battle between AI Go is a fight of God beyond human
understanding. So if a human gives human aesthetics as an obvious
goal, artificial intelligence creates art. This is "Human Aesthetics /
Machine Art." However, human aesthetics are not trivial, for example,
the Eiffel Tower made by machine calculation was initially criticized by
artists for not being aesthetic. Such "Machine Aesthetics / Human Art"
will arrive at the "art for art's sake" that aimed at art itself. Well today,
artificial intelligence cannot find its own goal. But if this premise breaks
down, artificial intelligence can make art aimed at machine aesthetics.
If this arrives at "art for art's sake," "Machine Aesthetics / Machine Art"
beyond human understanding will emerge.

唯物論的美意識発生仮説（1/2）
• 主目標：遺伝子の保全（ドーキンス『利己的な遺伝子』）
• →副目標：個体ならびに近親者の生存
• →副目標：個体ならびに近親者の自己複製
• ・・・・・・・・・・化学物質から生物への進化、下等生物から高等生物への進化
• →→副々目標：集団内での競争（異性獲得の為の美意識的なもの）
• →→副々目標：集団全体の拡大再生産的発展（集団IDの美意識的なもの）
• ・・・・・・・・・・高等生物からヒトへの進化

唯物論的美意識発生仮説（2/2）
• 仮説追加：「生成された副目標は、主目標と矛盾しない限り淘汰されない」「主目
標、副目標、副々目標、副々々目標、…の間に主副のヒエラルキーは（無意識下
では）無い」「ヒトは伝聞的知識からも目標を生成できる（歴史から学べる）」
• 「目標：国王（や神）を称えるための技術」＝「美しい技術」＝「芸術」の発生
• 技術と芸術の分離…１王権（神権）失墜２写真の登場
• しかし存続…１既成権威によらずそれ自体で権威２実用によらずそれ自体で価値
• 芸術の自律性…芸術の為の芸術
• 芸術と娯楽の分離（揶揄対象としてのイラスト、劇伴、売文）

人工知能はそもそも不穏である | AI Is Disquieting by Nature [J/E]

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Más de 中ザワヒデキ Hideki Nakazawa

Más de 中ザワヒデキ Hideki Nakazawa (18)

Último

Último (20)

人工知能はそもそも不穏である | AI Is Disquieting by Nature [J/E]