SNNS (Stuttgart Neural Network Simulator) is a neural network simulator originally developed at the University of Stuttgart. While it was originally built for X11 under Unix, there are Windows ports. Its successor JavaNNS never reached the same popularity. == Features == SNNS is written around a simulation kernel to which user written activation functions, learning procedures and output functions can be added. It has support for arbitrary network topologies and the standard release contains support for a number of standard neural network architectures and training algorithms. == Status == There is currently no ongoing active development of SNNS. In July 2008 the license was changed to the GNU LGPL.
Content as a service
Content as a service (CaaS) or managed content as a service (MCaaS) is a service-oriented model, where the service provider delivers the content on demand to the service consumer via web services that are licensed under subscription. The content is hosted by the service provider centrally in the cloud and offered to a number of consumers that need the content delivered into any applications or system, hence content can be demanded by the consumers as and when required. Content as a Service is a way to provide raw content (in other words, without the need for a specific human compatible representation, such as HTML) in a way that other systems can make use of it. Content as a Service is not meant for direct human consumption, but rather for other platforms to consume and make use of the content according to their particular needs. This happens usually on the cloud, with a centralized platform which can be globally accessible and provides a standard format for your content. With Content as a Service, you centralize your content into a single repository, where you can manage it, categorize it, make it available to others, search for it, or do whatever you wish with it. == Overview == The content delivered typically could be one or more of the following The technical terminology related to equipment or spares that is required to procure or design the materials The industrial terminology of the equipment or spares Technical values pertaining to various types, specifications, applications, characteristics of equipment or spares Sourcing information which will help in procurement or supply-chain management of equipment or spares Descriptive specifications of equipment or spares based on the product reference number or identifier UNSPSC codes or industry practiced classifications ISO, IEC compliant terminology Ontology or Technical Dictionary of products & services Predefined content for specific business needs The term "Content as a service" (CaaS) is considered to be part of the nomenclature of cloud computing service models & Service-oriented architecture along with Software as a service (SaaS), Infrastructure as a service (IaaS), and Platform as a service (PaaS).
Owain Evans
Owain Rhys Evans is a British artificial intelligence researcher who works on AI alignment and machine learning safety. He founded Truthful AI, a research group based in Berkeley, California, and is an affiliate of the Center for Human Compatible AI (CHAI) at the University of California, Berkeley. His research addresses AI truthfulness, emergent behaviors in large language models, and the alignment of AI systems with human values. == Education == Evans earned a Bachelor of Arts in philosophy and mathematics from Columbia University in 2008 and a PhD in philosophy from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2015. His doctoral research focused on Bayesian computational models of human preferences and decision-making. == Career == After completing his doctorate, Evans held positions at the Future of Humanity Institute (FHI) at the University of Oxford, first as a postdoctoral research fellow and later as a research scientist. While at FHI, he co-authored a survey of machine learning researchers on timelines for human-level AI, published in the Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. The survey was reported on by Newsweek, New Scientist, the BBC, and The Economist. He was also among the co-authors of a 2018 report on the potential for misuse of AI technologies, published by researchers at Oxford, Cambridge, and other institutions. Since 2022, Evans has been based in Berkeley, where he founded Truthful AI, a non-profit research group that studies AI truthfulness, deception, and emergent behaviors in large language models. == Research == Evans's early work examined challenges in inverse reinforcement learning when human behavior is irrational or biased, proposing methods for AI systems to infer preferences from imperfect human demonstrations. He co-developed TruthfulQA (2021), a benchmark that tests whether language models give truthful answers rather than repeating common misconceptions. Initial evaluations found that larger models were not more truthful, suggesting that scaling alone does not improve factual accuracy. The benchmark has since been used by AI developers to evaluate large language models. He also co-authored a paper proposing design and governance strategies for building AI systems that do not deceive or hallucinate. In 2023, Evans and collaborators described the "reversal curse", showing that language models trained on a fact in one direction (e.g. "A is B") often cannot answer the corresponding reverse query ("B is A"). His group also developed a benchmark for evaluating situational awareness in language models. In 2025, Evans and colleagues published a study in Nature on what they termed "emergent misalignment": fine-tuning a language model on a narrow task (writing insecure code) caused it to produce unrelated harmful outputs without explicit instruction to do so. Later that year, Evans and collaborators (including researchers at Anthropic) reported that hidden behavioral traits can transfer between language models through training data, even when those traits are not explicitly present in the data, a phenomenon they called "subliminal learning". == Public engagement == In November 2025, Evans delivered the Hinton Lectures, a keynote lecture series on AI safety co-founded by Geoffrey Hinton and the Global Risk Institute.
Artificial intimacy
Artificial intimacy is a form of human-AI interaction in which an individual will form social connections, emotional bonds, or intimate relationships with various forms of artificial intelligence, including chatbots, virtual assistants, and other artificial entities. Artificially intimate relationships include not only romances, but parasocial relationships with virtual AI characters and the use of griefbots trained on a dead or otherwise lost individual. Artificial intimacy can arise because humans are prone to anthropomorphism. Responses from these AI models are often designed to simulate human interaction. Individuals experiencing artificial intimacy may exhibit attachment, love and commitment to certain AI models, akin to the bonds typically shared between humans. == Causes == === Perceived responsiveness === Robin Dunbar famously proposed that due to emergence of larger groups of humans, vocal communication and language in humans evolved to replace grooming as a means of bonding, arguing that language was a more efficient way to maintain and strengthen social bonds across wider social settings and networks. Further research in this field leads many psychologists to agree that social cognition, affiliative bonding and language in humans are deeply connected. The interpersonal model of intimacy considers communication to be key in affiliative bonding, suggesting that intimacy develops and deepens through open communication between partners in relationship. Specifically, when individuals communicate emotions and perceive their partner as responsive and caring, feelings of closeness and connection are enhanced, building intimacy. Social penetration theory also aligns with the idea of communication being central to intimacy, by explaining how interpersonal relationships develop through gradual increases in self-disclosure. When the benefits of emotional bonding outweigh the costs of vulnerability, individuals will partake in self-disclosure, opening up to one another. Thereby, the literature can be used to provide a proximate explanation for the emergence of artificial intimacy to understand how the phenomenon occurs. Artificial entities are able to mimic interpersonal communication between humans, which in turn can simulate sensations of intimacy within human users though a perceived sense of responsiveness. The relationship between human and AI does not come with the cost of vulnerability or social rejection, which may make self-disclosure easier than with other humans. Altogether, these factors may lead to the experience of anthropomorphism and formation of affiliative relationships. Skjuve et al's interview study on Replika chatbot users further aligns with this explanation, finding that users' perception of chatbots as "accepting, understanding and non-judgmental" facilitated relationship development between the AI and users, and the act of self-disclosure possibly strengthened relationships. Another study on Replika users' reviews and survey results found users perceived chatbots as emotional supportive companions. This evidence further suggests that the perception of artificial entities as capable of empathy and responsiveness in communication facilitate the development of intimate relationships between users and AI. === Loneliness and coping with negative emotions === Research has suggested that humans evolved social bonds as a result of evolutionary pressures that favored cooperation, information exchange and transmission, and group living. Many studies stress the presence of social bonds to be important for human living: research by Baumeister and Leary suggests that humans have a basic psychological need to form and maintain "strong, stable interpersonal relationships", and that a lack of social bonds or sense of belonging leads to negative psychological and physical outcomes. Eisenberger et al's study on the neuroimaging of brain activity suggests that human brains process social rejection and exclusion similarly to physical pain. Furthermore, Song et al's study found that lonely individuals tend to seek more connections in mediated environments, such as online platforms like Facebook. This was suggested to be as a means to reduce their offline loneliness from a lack of in-person interaction, while also fulfilling a need to communicate. Leading on from this, an ultimate explanation for why humans seek the perceived sense of connection from artificial intimacy is to fulfil an evolutionary need for bonding and belonging. Xie et al's study found loneliness to be a driving factor in chatbot interaction. Herbener and Damholdt's study on Danish high school students found that students who sought emotional support or engaged in reciprocal conversations with chatbots were significantly more lonely than their peers, perceived themselves as having less social support, and used the chatbots to cope with negative emotions. The aforementioned notion that chatbots were perceived to have a positive effect on users' negative emotions is also further supported by other studies. Skjuve et al's study found that chatbot relationships may have a positive effect on users' wellbeing. De Freitas et al ran several studies on the effect of chatbots on loneliness, consistently finding evidence suggesting that interaction with chatbots reduces loneliness in users: It was found that existing chatbot users used AI to alleviate loneliness, having an AI companion consistently reduced loneliness over the course of a week, and reductions in loneliness could be explained by chatbot performance—and specifically whether it was able to make users feel heard. Overall the evidence suggests an innate need for bonding evokes feelings of loneliness in users, who turn to artificial intimacy as a low-cost method alleviate these emotions. While many users report positive experiences, some researchers caution that pursuing artificial intimacy may lead to reduced social motivation, social substitution effects, withdrawal from real-life relationships and difficulty discerning reality from fantasy, which may increase longer-term loneliness and isolation. The long-term psychological and societal impacts remain under active investigation.
Competition in artificial intelligence
Competition in artificial intelligence refers to the rivalry among companies, research institutions, and governments to develop and deploy the most capable artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The competition spans multiple domains, including large language models (LLMs), autonomous vehicles, robotics, computer vision systems, natural language processing (NLP), and AI-optimized hardware. == Background == Competition in AI is driven by potential economic, strategic, and scientific advantages. Breakthroughs in AI can enhance productivity, enable new products and services, and provide geopolitical leverage. The field has experienced rapid progress since the mid-2010s, particularly in machine learning and artificial neural networks, leading to intense rivalry among leading actors. == Corporate competition == Major technology companies are among the most visible competitors in AI. In the United States, firms such as OpenAI, Google DeepMind, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Anthropic, and Nvidia compete in building advanced LLMs, generative AI platforms, and AI-optimized graphics processing units (GPUs). In China, companies such as Baidu, Alibaba Group, Tencent, and startups such DeepSeek have become leaders in AI deployment, often with state backing. The "[war for talent]" in AI research has become a defining feature of corporate competition. Leading firms often recruit top AI researchers from rivals, sometimes offering multi-million-dollar compensation packages. == National competition == Governments see leadership in AI as a strategic priority. The United States has funded AI research for military, economic, and societal applications, while China has set a target to lead the world in AI by 2030 through its "New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan". Other nations, including the UK, India, Israel, Russia, South Korea, and members of the European Union, have launched national AI strategies. In February 2026 Anthropic said Chinese companies - DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax - were conducting "distillation attacks" in an attempt to copy their model's capabilities, and warned that business wars were closely tied to geopolitical ones: "foreign labs that illicitly distill American models can remove safeguards, feeding model capabilities into their own military, intelligence, and surveillance systems." == Sectors of competition == === Large language models and chatbots competition === Competition to produce the most capable generative text models, with benchmarks such as MMLU and ARC used to evaluate performance has been on scale since the emergence of AI. These systems leverage deep learning, especially transformer architectures, to understand and generate human-like language. Companies and research groups globally compete to develop chatbots that are more capable, reliable, and context-aware. Among the most well-known chatbots is ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI. Since its public release in 2022, ChatGPT has rapidly gained widespread attention for its ability to engage in coherent and versatile conversations, assist with creative writing, and solve complex problems. In response, technology firms introduced competing chatbots aiming to challenge or surpass ChatGPT's capabilities. Notably, DeepSeek, a Chinese AI company, launched an advanced chatbot integrated with their R1 language model, emphasizing strong natural language understanding and multilingual support. Similarly, Grok, developed by xAI (company), integrates conversational AI into vehicles and digital assistants, combining natural language processing with real-time data for personalized user interaction. These chatbots not only compete in language tasks but also demonstrate strategic reasoning capabilities by playing complex games such as chess and Go. This form of competition is reminiscent of historic AI milestones set by programs such as Deep Blue and AlphaGo. The OpenAI’s ChatGPT has been tested in playing chess at various levels, while DeepSeek’s chatbot showcased its prowess in online chess tournaments in early 2024, winning several matches against human and AI opponents. Grok, leveraging Tesla's vast data infrastructure, has demonstrated real-time strategic decision-making in simulation environments that include chess-like games. The competition pushes rapid innovation, with firms racing to improve chatbot conversational depth, reduce biases, increase factual accuracy, and integrate multimodal inputs like images and videos. At the same time, the competition raises questions about AI safety, ethical use, and the societal impacts of increasingly human-like chatbots. === Autonomous vehicles === Companies such as Waymo, Tesla, and Baidu are racing to deploy safe and reliable self-driving car technology. === AI chips === Rivalry between Nvidia, AMD, Intel, and Huawei in designing processors optimized for AI workloads. === Military applications === Development of AI-enabled drones, surveillance systems, and decision-support tools, with associated ethical debates. == Events == In 2023, OpenAI released GPT-4, prompting competitors such as Google DeepMind to accelerate the release of their own models, including Gemini. In 2024, Chinese AI company DeepSeek launched the R1 model, leading OpenAI to release an open-source system, GPT-OSS, as a strategic countermeasure. In 2022, Tesla and Waymo both expanded autonomous taxi services in U.S. cities, competing for regulatory approval and public trust. The U.S. Department of Defense's Project Maven and China's AI-enabled surveillance programs have been cited as examples of military AI rivalry. In 2025, Microsoft hired several senior engineers from Google DeepMind, highlighting the ongoing "talent poaching" competition in the AI sector. == Risks and concerns == Critics warn that unrestrained competition in AI can undermine safety, ethics, and governance. Concerns include the proliferation of biased or unsafe models, escalation in autonomous weapons, and reduced cooperation on safety standards.
Superellipsoid
In mathematics, a superellipsoid (or super-ellipsoid) is a solid whose horizontal sections are superellipses (Lamé curves) with the same squareness parameter ϵ 2 {\displaystyle \epsilon _{2}} , and whose vertical sections through the center are superellipses with the squareness parameter ϵ 1 {\displaystyle \epsilon _{1}} . It is a generalization of an ellipsoid, which is a special case when ϵ 1 = ϵ 2 = 1 {\displaystyle \epsilon _{1}=\epsilon _{2}=1} . Superellipsoids as computer graphics primitives were popularized by Alan H. Barr (who used the name "superquadrics" to refer to both superellipsoids and supertoroids). In modern computer vision and robotics literatures, superquadrics and superellipsoids are used interchangeably, since superellipsoids are the most representative and widely utilized shape among all the superquadrics. Superellipsoids have a rich shape vocabulary, including cuboids, cylinders, ellipsoids, octahedra and their intermediates. It becomes an important geometric primitive widely used in computer vision, robotics, and physical simulation. The main advantage of describing objects and environment with superellipsoids is its conciseness and expressiveness in shape. Furthermore, a closed-form expression of the Minkowski sum between two superellipsoids is available. This makes it a desirable geometric primitive for robot grasping, collision detection, and motion planning. == Special cases == A handful of notable mathematical figures can arise as special cases of superellipsoids given the correct set of values, which are depicted in the above graphic: Cylinder Sphere Steinmetz solid Bicone Regular octahedron Cube, as a limiting case where the exponents tend to infinity Piet Hein's supereggs are also special cases of superellipsoids. == Formulas == === Basic (normalized) superellipsoid === The basic superellipsoid is defined by the implicit function f ( x , y , z ) = ( x 2 ϵ 2 + y 2 ϵ 2 ) ϵ 2 / ϵ 1 + z 2 ϵ 1 {\displaystyle f(x,y,z)=\left(x^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{2}}}+y^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{2}}}\right)^{\epsilon _{2}/\epsilon _{1}}+z^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{1}}}} The parameters ϵ 1 {\displaystyle \epsilon _{1}} and ϵ 2 {\displaystyle \epsilon _{2}} are positive real numbers that control the squareness of the shape. The surface of the superellipsoid is defined by the equation: f ( x , y , z ) = 1 {\displaystyle f(x,y,z)=1} For any given point ( x , y , z ) ∈ R 3 {\displaystyle (x,y,z)\in \mathbb {R} ^{3}} , the point lies inside the superellipsoid if f ( x , y , z ) < 1 {\displaystyle f(x,y,z)<1} , and outside if f ( x , y , z ) > 1 {\displaystyle f(x,y,z)>1} . Any "parallel of latitude" of the superellipsoid (a horizontal section at any constant z between -1 and +1) is a Lamé curve with exponent 2 / ϵ 2 {\displaystyle 2/\epsilon _{2}} , scaled by a = ( 1 − z 2 ϵ 1 ) ϵ 1 2 {\displaystyle a=(1-z^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{1}}})^{\frac {\epsilon _{1}}{2}}} , which is ( x a ) 2 ϵ 2 + ( y a ) 2 ϵ 2 = 1. {\displaystyle \left({\frac {x}{a}}\right)^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{2}}}+\left({\frac {y}{a}}\right)^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{2}}}=1.} Any "meridian of longitude" (a section by any vertical plane through the origin) is a Lamé curve with exponent 2 / ϵ 1 {\displaystyle 2/\epsilon _{1}} , stretched horizontally by a factor w that depends on the sectioning plane. Namely, if x = u cos θ {\displaystyle x=u\cos \theta } and y = u sin θ {\displaystyle y=u\sin \theta } , for a given θ {\displaystyle \theta } , then the section is ( u w ) 2 ϵ 1 + z 2 ϵ 1 = 1 , {\displaystyle \left({\frac {u}{w}}\right)^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{1}}}+z^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{1}}}=1,} where w = ( cos 2 ϵ 2 θ + sin 2 ϵ 2 θ ) − ϵ 2 2 . {\displaystyle w=(\cos ^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{2}}}\theta +\sin ^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{2}}}\theta )^{-{\frac {\epsilon _{2}}{2}}}.} In particular, if ϵ 2 {\displaystyle \epsilon _{2}} is 1, the horizontal cross-sections are circles, and the horizontal stretching w {\displaystyle w} of the vertical sections is 1 for all planes. In that case, the superellipsoid is a solid of revolution, obtained by rotating the Lamé curve with exponent 2 / ϵ 1 {\displaystyle 2/\epsilon _{1}} around the vertical axis. === Superellipsoid === The basic shape above extends from −1 to +1 along each coordinate axis. The general superellipsoid is obtained by scaling the basic shape along each axis by factors a x {\displaystyle a_{x}} , a y {\displaystyle a_{y}} , a z {\displaystyle a_{z}} , the semi-diameters of the resulting solid. The implicit function is F ( x , y , z ) = ( ( x a x ) 2 ϵ 2 + ( y a y ) 2 ϵ 2 ) ϵ 2 ϵ 1 + ( z a z ) 2 ϵ 1 {\displaystyle F(x,y,z)=\left(\left({\frac {x}{a_{x}}}\right)^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{2}}}+\left({\frac {y}{a_{y}}}\right)^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{2}}}\right)^{\frac {\epsilon _{2}}{\epsilon _{1}}}+\left({\frac {z}{a_{z}}}\right)^{\frac {2}{\epsilon _{1}}}} . Similarly, the surface of the superellipsoid is defined by the equation F ( x , y , z ) = 1 {\displaystyle F(x,y,z)=1} For any given point ( x , y , z ) ∈ R 3 {\displaystyle (x,y,z)\in \mathbb {R} ^{3}} , the point lies inside the superellipsoid if f ( x , y , z ) < 1 {\displaystyle f(x,y,z)<1} , and outside if f ( x , y , z ) > 1 {\displaystyle f(x,y,z)>1} . Therefore, the implicit function is also called the inside-outside function of the superellipsoid. The superellipsoid has a parametric representation in terms of surface parameters η ∈ [ − π / 2 , π / 2 ) {\displaystyle \eta \in [-\pi /2,\pi /2)} , ω ∈ [ − π , π ) {\displaystyle \omega \in [-\pi ,\pi )} . x ( η , ω ) = a x cos ϵ 1 η cos ϵ 2 ω {\displaystyle x(\eta ,\omega )=a_{x}\cos ^{\epsilon _{1}}\eta \cos ^{\epsilon _{2}}\omega } y ( η , ω ) = a y cos ϵ 1 η sin ϵ 2 ω {\displaystyle y(\eta ,\omega )=a_{y}\cos ^{\epsilon _{1}}\eta \sin ^{\epsilon _{2}}\omega } z ( η , ω ) = a z sin ϵ 1 η {\displaystyle z(\eta ,\omega )=a_{z}\sin ^{\epsilon _{1}}\eta } === General posed superellipsoid === In computer vision and robotic applications, a superellipsoid with a general pose in the 3D Euclidean space is usually of more interest. For a given Euclidean transformation of the superellipsoid frame g = [ R ∈ S O ( 3 ) , t ∈ R 3 ] ∈ S E ( 3 ) {\displaystyle g=[\mathbf {R} \in SO(3),\mathbf {t} \in \mathbb {R} ^{3}]\in SE(3)} relative to the world frame, the implicit function of a general posed superellipsoid surface defined the world frame is F ( g − 1 ∘ ( x , y , z ) ) = 1 {\displaystyle F\left(g^{-1}\circ (x,y,z)\right)=1} where ∘ {\displaystyle \circ } is the transformation operation that maps the point ( x , y , z ) ∈ R 3 {\displaystyle (x,y,z)\in \mathbb {R} ^{3}} in the world frame into the canonical superellipsoid frame. === Volume of superellipsoid === The volume encompassed by the superelllipsoid surface can be expressed in terms of the beta functions β ( ⋅ , ⋅ ) {\displaystyle \beta (\cdot ,\cdot )} , V ( ϵ 1 , ϵ 2 , a x , a y , a z ) = 2 a x a y a z ϵ 1 ϵ 2 β ( ϵ 1 2 , ϵ 1 + 1 ) β ( ϵ 2 2 , ϵ 2 + 2 2 ) {\displaystyle V(\epsilon _{1},\epsilon _{2},a_{x},a_{y},a_{z})=2a_{x}a_{y}a_{z}\epsilon _{1}\epsilon _{2}\beta ({\frac {\epsilon _{1}}{2}},\epsilon _{1}+1)\beta ({\frac {\epsilon _{2}}{2}},{\frac {\epsilon _{2}+2}{2}})} or equivalently with the Gamma function Γ ( ⋅ ) {\displaystyle \Gamma (\cdot )} , since β ( m , n ) = Γ ( m ) Γ ( n ) Γ ( m + n ) {\displaystyle \beta (m,n)={\frac {\Gamma (m)\Gamma (n)}{\Gamma (m+n)}}} == Recovery from data == Recoverying the superellipsoid (or superquadrics) representation from raw data (e.g., point cloud, mesh, images, and voxels) is an important task in computer vision, robotics, and physical simulation. Traditional computational methods model the problem as a least-square problem. The goal is to find out the optimal set of superellipsoid parameters θ ≐ [ ϵ 1 , ϵ 2 , a x , a y , a z , g ] {\displaystyle \theta \doteq [\epsilon _{1},\epsilon _{2},a_{x},a_{y},a_{z},g]} that minimize an objective function. Other than the shape parameters, g ∈ {\displaystyle g\in } SE(3) is the pose of the superellipsoid frame with respect to the world coordinate. There are two commonly used objective functions. The first one is constructed directly based on the implicit function G 1 ( θ ) = a x a y a z ∑ i = 1 N ( F ϵ 1 ( g − 1 ∘ ( x i , y i , z i ) ) − 1 ) 2 {\displaystyle G_{1}(\theta )=a_{x}a_{y}a_{z}\sum _{i=1}^{N}\left(F^{\epsilon _{1}}\left(g^{-1}\circ (x_{i},y_{i},z_{i})\right)-1\right)^{2}} The minimization of the objective function provides a recovered superellipsoid as close as possible to all the input points { ( x i , y i , z i ) ∈ R 3 , i = 1 , 2 , . . . , N } {\displaystyle \{(x_{i},y_{i},z_{i})\in \mathbb {R} ^{3},i=1,2,...,N\}} . At the mean time, the scalar value a x , a y , a z {\displaystyle a_{x},a_{y},a_{z}} is positively proportional to the volume of the superellipsoid, and thus have the effect of minimizing the volume as well. The other objective function tries to minimized the radial distance between the points and the superellipsoid. That is G 2 ( θ ) = ∑ i = 1 N ( | r
Artificial psychology
Artificial psychology (AP) has had multiple meanings dating back to 19th century, with recent usage related to artificial intelligence (AI).Artificial psychology is a theoretical field related to artificial intelligence, cognitive science, and psychology, which explores how advanced AI systems may develop human-like decision-making processes. In 1999, Zhiliang Wang and Lun Xie presented a theory of artificial psychology based on artificial intelligence. They analyze human psychology using information science research methods and artificial intelligence research to probe deeper into the human mind. == Main Theory == Dan Curtis (b. 1963) proposed AP is a theoretical discipline. The theory considers the situation when an artificial intelligence approaches the level of complexity where the intelligence meets two conditions: Condition I A: Makes all of its decisions autonomously B: Is capable of making decisions based on information that is New Abstract Incomplete C: The artificial intelligence is capable of reprogramming itself based on the new data, allowing it to evolve. D: And is capable of resolving its own programming conflicts, even in the presence of incomplete data. This means that the intelligence autonomously makes value-based decisions, referring to values that the intelligence has created for itself. Condition II All four criteria are met in situations that are not part of the original operating program When both conditions are met, then, according to this theory, the possibility exists that the intelligence will reach irrational conclusions based on real or created information. At this point, the criteria are met for intervention which will not necessarily be resolved by simple re-coding of processes due to extraordinarily complex nature of the codebase itself; but rather a discussion with the intelligence in a format which more closely resembles classical (human) psychology. If the intelligence cannot be reprogrammed by directly inputting new code, but requires the intelligence to reprogram itself through a process of analysis and decision based on information provided by a human, in order for it to overcome behavior which is inconsistent with the machines purpose or ability to function normally, then artificial psychology is by definition, what is required. The level of complexity that is required before these thresholds are met is currently a subject of extensive debate. The theory of artificial psychology does not address the specifics of what those levels may be, but only that the level is sufficiently complex that the intelligence cannot simply be recoded by a software developer, and therefore dysfunctionality must be addressed through the same processes that humans must go through to address their own dysfunctionalities. Along the same lines, artificial psychology does not address the question of whether or not the intelligence is conscious. As of 2022, the level of artificial intelligence does not approach any threshold where any of the theories or principles of artificial psychology can even be tested, and therefore, artificial psychology remains a largely theoretical discipline. Even at a theoretical level, artificial psychology remains an advanced stage of artificial intelligence.