| You would enjoy Saygin et al, (2000) [1] ('Turing test: 50 years later). 'Not getting math right' is part of a classic repertoire of cheap hacks used to pass the Turing test by mimicking 'how' a human might speak. This includes pauses in typing, grammatical errors, fillers such as 'like' and on son in order to pass the TT, instead of building language competency so well that passing the TT is a by-product.
It's like 'teaching to the test' instead of teaching the subject. "Some people interpret the TT as a setting in which you can "cheat". The game has no rules constraining the design of the machines. At some places in the paper, Turing describes how machines could be "rigged" to overcome certain obstacles proposed by opponents of the idea that machines can think. "A very obvious example is about machines making mistakes. When the machine is faced with an arithmetical operation, in order not to give away its identity by being fast and accurate, it can pause for about 30 seconds before responding and occasionally give a wrong answer. Being able to carry out arithmetical calculations fast and accurately is generally considered intelligent behavior. However, Turing wishes to sacrifice this at the expense of human-ness. "Some commentators think this is "cheating". The machine is resorting to certain "tricks" in its operations rather than imitating the human ways. However, arithmetic is a highly specific domain. Modifying the programs in this manner cannot hurt: If a machine can pass the test, it can then be re-programmed not to cheat at arithmetic. If it does not resort to this, the interrogator can ask a difficult arithmetical problem as his/her first question and decide that he/she is dealing with a machine right then and there." [1]: Saygin, A. P., Cicekli, I., & Akman, V. (2000). Turing test: 50 years later. Minds and machines, 10(4), 463-518. |