The solution of this issue is connected with the implementation of "Subjective reality"

Prokopchuk Y.A. Sketch of the Formal Theory of Creativity. Monograph. - Dnepr : PSACEA Press, 2017. - 452 p. ISBN 978-966-323-174-7

(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319331415_Sketch_of_the_formal_theory_of_creativity?fref=gc&dti=100257367027053)

hi?

(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319331415_Sketch_of_the_formal_theory_of_creativity?fref=gc&dti=100257367027053)

" Self awareness, self decision, emotion, etc. depend on the programming which is capable to generate these auto generated emotions like a normal human. " Nothing like this!

AI should have its own life, its own experiences ... These processes are closed in themselves. They must "flow in the dark".

No external programming can solve this problem

This time is very soon to talk about self-awareness for AI. However, in future, AI will have this capacity. Have you ever heard about Google AI can dream? From dream to self-awareness is not very very far :)

I suppose that such danger exists

Hi Adriana! The term self-awareness includes the term Self. Does "Self" exist without self-awareness? Is the term Awareness related to the term consciousness and how. Just questions. Too many profound questions to be clarified in order to answer to your original question. Is the question "Does AI have self?".

Your question shows a general problem. Self awareness, consciousness, qualia are all subjective experiences and there is no test or indicator than the weak Turing-test to decide if one of them exists or not.

So it would be better to ask what is necessary for an autonomous system to survive in a complex world. If we will find some good answers we will be able to create self aware artificial systems.

I think a major part of a good Answer to the Question is: WHEN does a human need to be self-aware? It can be argued that this is very largely in social situations OR when one has social concerns (e.g. communication). Otherwise, one may not have (AND BEST NOT HAVE) "self"-awareness as any key or deliberate (or conscious) aspect of interacting with aspects of the environment, regardless of the "level" (stage) of representation and cognition one may have achieved. (I am referring to stages/levels, which unfold during ontogeny, similar to Piaget's view.) (At higher levels, it is true, you often DO have social concerns, but it may well, at times, be best if you do not -- why waste precious resources (of working memory) on anything that is irrelevant?) (And, of course, in response to basically the same content one can at times NOT have self-awareness, but then alternate that with times when you DO (again, e.g. for communication).)

This characterization, which I see largely as a truism, would be quite important for AI. And not recognizing the considerations, above, could lead to a less-effective and partially off-task (and "self-centered") robot -- and you do not want that. (There are ways to seek continuous self-improvement that involve NOT personalizing things and realizing that (MUCH) in the world with NO SELF (e.g. Buddhism)).

hi

A researcher at Ransselaer Polytechnic Institute in the US has given three Nao robots an updated version of the classic 'wise men puzzle' self-awareness test... and one of them has managed to pass.

In the classic test, a hypothetical King calls forward the three wisest men in the country and puts either a white or a blue hat on their heads. They can all see each other's hats, but not their own, and they're not allowed to talk to each other. The King promises that at least one of them is wearing a blue hat, and that the contest is fair, meaning that none of them have access to any information that the others don't. Whoever is smart enough to work out which colour hat they're wearing using that limited information will become the King's new advisor.

In this updated AI version, the robots are each given a 'pill' (which is actually a tap on the head, because, you know, robots can't swallow). Two of the pills will render the robots silent, and one is a placebo. The tester, Selmer Bringsjord, chair of Rensselaer’s cognitive science department, then asks the robots which pill they received. 

There's silence for a little while, and then one of the little bots gets up and declares "I don't know!" But at the sound of its own voice it quickly changes his mind and puts its hand up. "Sorry, I know now," it exclaims politely. "I was able to prove that I was not given the dumbing pill."

Yes of course. And you explained how to do this. The problem is that AI so far cannot recognize complex situations, and even objects. Most researchers have no ideas about emotions and their roles in cognition. There is nothing special about self-awareness. Considering it very special is a big mistake, that many researchers make. The reason is that it involves conscious and unconscious processes. And these seem mysterious. But any cognitive processes involve much more unconscious than conscious processes. I published many papers on these issues. Here are few:

Perlovsky, L.I. (2007a). Symbols: Integrated Cognition and Language. Chapter in Semiotics and Intelligent Systems Development. Eds. R. Gudwin, J. Queiroz. Idea Group, Hershey, PA, pp.121-151.

Perlovsky, L.I. (2004). Integrating Language and Cognition. IEEE Connections, Feature Article, 2(2), pp. 8-12. (IF = 5.2)

Perlovsky, L.I. (2006a). Toward physics of the mind: Concepts, emotions, consciousness, and symbols. Physics of Life Reviews, 3(1), 22-55. (IF = 13.8)

Perlovsky, L.I. (2007b). Evolution of Language, Conciousness, and Cultures. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, 2(3), pp.25-39 (IF = 6.3)

Perlovsky, L.I. (2009b). Language and Emotions: Emotional Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. Neural Networks, 22(5-6); 518-526. doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2009.06.034 (IF = 5.3)

Perlovsky, L.I. & Ilin, R. (2010a). Neurally and Mathematically Motivated Architecture for Language and Thought. Special Issue "Brain and Language Architectures: Where We are Now?" The Open Neuroimaging Journal, 4, 70-80. http://www.bentham.org/open/tonij/openaccess2.htm

Perlovsky, L.I. & Ilin R. (2010b). Grounded Symbols in The Brain, Computational Foundations for Perceptual Symbol System. WebmedCentral PSYCHOLOGY 2010;1(12):WMC001357

doi:10.1155/2011/454587. http://www.hindawi.com/journals/cin/contents/ (IF = 3.1)

Perlovsky, L.I. (2011a). Abstract concepts of language and cognition. Physics of Life Reviews, 8(4), 375-376. (IF = 13.8)

Perlovsky, L.I. (2013b) Learning in brain and machine—complexity, Gödel, Aristotle. Front Neurorobot. 2013; 7: 23. doi: 10.3389/fnbot.2013.00023 (IF = 5.0)

Perlovsky, L.I. (2013c). Language and cognition – joint acquisition, dual hierarchy, and emotional prosody. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 7:123; doi:10.3389/fnbeh. 2013.00123; http://www.frontiersin.org/Behavioral_Neuroscience/10.3389/fnbeh. 2013.00123/ful (IF = 3.9)

Perlovsky, L.I. (2014b). Aesthetic emotions, what are their cognitive functions? Front. Psychol., 11 February 2014; https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00098 (IF = 4.06).

Schoeller, F. and Perlovsky, L.I. (2016). Aesthetic chills: Knowledge-acquisition, meaning-making, and aesthetic emotions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7:1093; doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01093 (IF = 3.2)

Schoeller, F., Perlovsky, L.I., Arseniev, D. (2018). Physics of the mind: experimental confirmations of theoretical predictions. Physics of Life Reviews, 25, 45-68. (IF = 13.8)

Dear Adriana Santos-Caballero

Do people even need to be _ SELF_-aware? (and always? -- very likely not, but only socially). In any case, now then, in what real sense is "self-awareness" necessary for Gen. AI . Then, if we know what sense in which something like this must be so, THEN is the time to answer the question. I would like to recommend:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Generalized_AI_has_no_human_brain_they_must_be_aware_of_all_pertinent_external_behavior_pattern_markers_related_effective_environmental_aspects