# An Objective Laboratory Protocol for Evaluating Cognition of Non-Human Systems Against Human Cognition

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.08933 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.08933/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 2 of its 22 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Feb 2021.

## Builds on (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [The Lovelace 2.0 Test of Artificial Creativity and Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1410.6142/) (2014)
- [Detecting Qualia in Natural and Artificial Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1712.04020/) (2017)

## Abstract (arXiv)

In this paper I describe and reduce to practice an objective protocol for evaluating the cognitive capabilities of a non-human system against human cognition in a laboratory environment. This is important because the existence of a non-human system with cognitive capabilities comparable to those of humans might make once-philosophical questions of safety and ethics immediate and urgent. Past attempts to devise evaluation methods, such as the Turing Test and many others, have not met this need; most of them either emphasize a single aspect of human cognition or a single theory of intelligence, fail to capture the human capacity for generality and novelty, or require success in the physical world. The protocol is broadly Bayesian, in that its primary output is a confidence statistic in relation to a claim. Further, it provides insight into the areas where and to what extent a particular system falls short of human cognition, which can help to drive further progress or precautions.