Reverse Turing test subject of the test involves reversing the roles of the real and control subjects. When a Turing test is applied to a mixed group of human and computer subjects, the computers are the nominal subjects. However, the humans are judged in exactly the same way, and so their Turing test scores can also be calculated. This is another way of viewing the situation described in the previous section. The term "reverse Turing test" has also been applied to a Turing test (test of humanity) that is administered by a computer. In other words, a computer administers a test to determine
Turing test list of mechanical rules, without thinking or having a mind at all. John Searle has argued that external behaviour cannot be used to determine if a machine is "actually" thinking or merely "simulating thinking." His Chinese room argument is intended to show that, even if the Turing test is a good operational definition of intelligence, it may not indicate that the machine has a mind, consciousness, or intentionality. (Intentionality is a philosophical term for the power of thoughts to be "about" something.) Turing anticipated this line of criticism in his original paper, writing: In practice, the test's results can easily