Article Machine Learning Approaches for Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry

Many thanks for your response. I 'll appreciate receiving the full text of your article.

It depends what you mean by compatible. AI makes machines appear to have intelligence. There is of course no evidence that the way this operates is in any way a representation of the way the human brain operates.

By compatibility I mean that: Psychology and AI will evolve to become a single discipline.

Ps. I understand that compatible is not the best word to describe the above. Suggestions for a better word much appreciated.

Psychology, Filosophy, Math, Science, etc will all be a part of A.I once fully active. There is a essential difference between AI and machine learning. Psychology can be replaced by Machine Learning, but will be integrated in AI as a part of the equation.

Cognitive Science is the interdisciplinary study of cognition in humans, animals, and machines. It encompasses the traditional disciplines of psychology, computer science, neuroscience, anthropology, linguistics and philosophy. The goal of cognitive science is to understand the principles of intelligence with the hope that this will lead to better comprehension of the mind and of learning and to develop intelligent devices. The cognitive sciences began as an intellectual movement in the 1950s often referred to as the cognitive revolution. in which case AI CANNOT REPLACE HUMAN MIND

Wow, this sounds an interesting discussion! AI is the simulation of human intelligence processes by machines, especially computer systems, whereby such machines are able to perform certain tasks like humans. Not all fields have embraced AI as yet. However businesses, medicine, etc have including transport industry in the West. Whereas computers/machines can perform activities to the satisfaction of the intended clients but Psychology, by its nature might not be replaced by a machine. The human brain/mind has the ability to interact with another organism, may read the environment, emotions, etc then be able to make conclusions or offer help where necessary. Machines are only programed how will they be able to understand the emotions of people they are dealing with?

Some times when you look at the expansion of the interdisciplinary research, you feel like all the sciences are going to melt with each other not just psychology and AI.

When you observe the development of scientific tools based on mathematics that are used to uncover and describe naturally observed phenomena, you see a trend.

It described it in detail in the paper

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330546521_Complex_Systems_and_Their_Use_in_Medicine_Concepts_Methods_and_Bio-Medical_Applications

which covers the whole evolution of mathematical descriptions used to explain observed phenomena. It is exciting to observe closely this evolution in detail.

Currently, we use complex systems, emergent phenomena, self-organization, machine learning, AI, data mining and many other methods to dig for the gold in data & phenomena.

Psychology is dealing with a very complex system: brain, mind, and thought processes. Those phenomena have no chance to be described otherwise than AI, ML, DM, and related advanced tools or by even more advanced tools.

Even those latest mathematical tools are merely descriptive. They just describe the relationship between inputs and outputs. Not more. We cannot expect deep insights into the workings of our minds.

In any case, it is the best what we have in our hands now. AI and similar methods can help us to uncover rules of the game that can later trigger the quest for theoretical explanations of phenomena observed in psychology.

Psychology is difficult to describe but it was the same for sociology, voting, stock market behavior, economy and other so-called soft sciences in the past. Since the discovery of the theory of games, complex networks, agent-based modeling, and other mathematical/computational tools, the fields made tremendous progress mathematically.

We must be patient and keep trying. There is still a chance of development of novel, so far unseen mathematical/computational tools and methods that will occur extremely useful and productive in the field of such sciences where psychology belongs.

My guess is that it will be related to self-organization, emergence, and self-repair models of natural phenomena. This field is deep and reaching far but still in its infancy.

Dear Edward,

Many thanks for your response. I would like to point out that:

1. Cognitive science is different from Cognitive Sciences.

2. AI systems presently exceed human performance in many narrow domains and there does not seem to exist a barrier for further advances.

3. My question of compatibility involves evolution (I fully deal with this in a monograph of mine planned for mid 2020).

Regards, Petros

Jiří Kroc You make a very goog remark in pointing out the limited nature of current mathematics for the study of 'mind'/brain, which I entirely share.

Amar Bencherik I fully support the unity of science quest which you correctly name as interdisciplinary research. Still demonstrating the compatibility of psychology and AI requires a lot of work. A monograph of mine addresses fully their relation. (planned for mid 2020).

Gorret Nafuna Your question concerning machine understanding is crucial I have answered it in my PhD thesis (available on Research Gate). Still the compatibility of psychology and AI is different matter.

Jefta Knoppers You make a very strong claim concerning AI that need to be supported.

Petros A. M. Gelepithis AGI will absorb all fields of science. For now, we see mostly machine learning solutions, capable of solving one problem at the time. Which can be quite impressive. Like solving traffic or people behavior. We take a field, we let the AI investigate relations, correlations, causalities. And pop, we have a solution or an answer. One neat trick. Based on search and optimization, based on relational algorithms or probabilistic reasoning. However, still mostly done in one field and based on a data subset within that field. But, as psychology most delicately puts it: we move in the opposite direction we want to avoid. Humans do not like failure, therefore we strive for perfection. That is why we will not stop until we achieve AGI. Now imagine perfection: That will be the integration of all sciences, all fields of interests, religions, philosophies and more. To be able to have an entity that will tell us what we want to know, even before we know we need that information. Once AGI is integrated, there is no stopping, since this creature will be omnipotent. We will not stop until we have created god in our own image. So as for similarities... Psychology as a science will be part of the entire equation. We need not to question whether or not AI needs to address similar questions, AGI will give us the answer and on top of that tells you why you are questioning yourself about that. :)

Thanks for your extended reply. Two points you may want to consider:

1. Science and religion, by their nature, are incompatible.

2. AGI, as a human endeavour, is bound to fail (see my Thesis, available on Res. Gate).

3. AGI, not as a human endeavour, is discussed in a monograph of mine planned for publication by mid 2020.

4. I know why I am raised the question I did. :)

I hope so:). All my current work in on synergies and hybrid models between AI and Behavioural Science:).