PreprintCited by 21Philosophy and Theoretical SciencePsychiatry, Mental Health, NeuroscienceEmbodied and Extended Cognition

The DOI matches its DataCite record; its reference list is not available.

On the link between conscious function and general intelligence in humans and machines

Open access
Juliani, Arthur, Arulkumaran, Kai, Sasai, Shuntaro, Kanai, Ryota·2022·arXiv

Abstract

In popular media, there is often a connection drawn between the advent of awareness in artificial agents and those same agents simultaneously achieving human or superhuman level intelligence. In this work, we explore the validity and potential application of this seemingly intuitive link between consciousness and intelligence. We do so by examining the cognitive abilities associated with three contemporary theories of conscious function: Global Workspace Theory (GWT), Information Generation Theory (IGT), and Attention Schema Theory (AST). We find that all three theories specifically relate conscious function to some aspect of domain-general intelligence in humans. With this insight, we turn to the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and find that, while still far from demonstrating general intelligence, many state-of-the-art deep learning methods have begun to incorporate key aspects of each of the three functional theories. Having identified this trend, we use the motivating example of mental time travel in humans to propose ways in which insights from each of the three theories may be combined into a single unified and implementable model. Given that it is made possible by cognitive abilities underlying each of the three functional theories, artificial agents capable of mental time travel would not only possess greater general intelligence than current approaches, but also be more consistent with our current understanding of the functional role of consciousness in humans, thus making it a promising near-term goal for AI research.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2204.05133

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The P300/P3b global effect test has looked to the global workspace theory for support.

    “For example, the P300/P3b global effect test [37] has looked to the global workspace theory (GWT) for support [46]”

    From Tests for consciousness in humans and beyond (2024) · cites this paper as [46]

Citations

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

Cited by 21

Metadata

Authors
Juliani, A., Arulkumaran, K., Sasai, S., & Kanai, R.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2022
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4223569766
Cited by
21
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Moonshot Research and Development Program (JPMJMS 2012)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Psychiatry, Mental Health, Neuroscience
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
Keywords
consciousness, general intelligence, global workspace theory, attention schema theory, mental time travel, artificial agents, deep learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review