In AI, the existential risk denotes the hypothetical threat posed by an artificial system that would possess both the capability and the objective, either directly or indirectly, to eradicate humanity. This issue is gaining prominence in scientific debate due to recent technical advancements and increased media coverage. In parallel, AI progress has sparked speculation and studies about the potential emergence of artificial consciousness. The two questions, AI consciousness and existential risk, are sometimes conflated, as if the former entailed the latter. Here, I explain that this view stems from a common confusion between consciousness and intelligence. Yet these two properties are empirically and theoretically distinct. Arguably, while intelligence is a direct predictor of an AI system's existential threat, consciousness is not. There are, however, certain incidental scenarios in which consciousness could influence existential risk, in either direction. Consciousness could be viewed as a means towards AI alignment, thereby lowering existential risk; or, it could be a precondition for reaching certain capabilities or levels of intelligence, and thus positively related to existential risk. Recognizing these distinctions can help AI safety researchers and public policymakers focus on the most pressing issues.

Human consciousness is still a concept hard to define with current scientific understanding. Although Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated significant advancements across various domains including translation and summarization, human consciousness is not something to imitate with current upfront technology owing to so-called hallucination. This study, therefore, proposes a novel approach to address these challenges by integrating psychoanalysis and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) into constructing consciousness and personality modules. We developed three artificial consciousnesses (self-awareness, unconsciousness, and preconsciousness) based on the principles of psychoanalysis. Additionally, we designed 16 characters with different personalities representing the sixteen MBTI types, with several attributes such as needs, status, and memories. To determine if our model's artificial consciousness exhibits human-like cognition, we created ten distinct situations considering seven attributes such as emotional understanding and logical thinking. The decision-making process of artificial consciousness and the final action were evaluated in three ways: survey evaluation, three-tier classification via ChatGPT, and qualitative review. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses indicated a high likelihood of well-simulated consciousness, although the difference in response between different characters and consciousnesses was not very significant. This implies that the developed models incorporating elements of psychoanalysis and personality theory can lead to building a more intuitive and adaptable AI system with humanoid consciousness. Therefore, this study contributes to opening up new avenues for improving AI interactions in complex cognitive contexts.

Whether artificial intelligence (AI) systems can possess consciousness is a contentious question because of the inherent challenges of defining and operationalizing subjective experience. This paper proposes a framework to reframe the question of artificial consciousness into empirically tractable tests. We introduce three evaluative criteria - S (subjective-linguistic), L (latent-emergent), and P (phenomenological-structural) - collectively termed SLP-tests, which assess whether an AI system instantiates interface representations that facilitate consciousness-like properties.

With the significant progress of artificial intelligence (AI) and consciousness science, artificial consciousness (AC) has recently gained popularity. This work provides a broad overview of the main topics and current trends in AC. The first part traces the history of this interdisciplinary field to establish context and clarify key terminology, including the distinction between Weak and Strong AC. The second part examines major trends in AC implementations, emphasising the synergy between Global Workspace and Attention Schema, as well as the problem of evaluating the internal states of artificial systems. The third part analyses the ethical dimension of AC development, revealing both critical risks and transformative opportunities. The last part offers recommendations to guide AC research responsibly, and outlines the limitations of this study as well as avenues for future research. The main conclusion is that while AC appears both indispensable and inevitable for scientific progress, serious efforts are required to address the far-reaching impact of this innovative research path.

This paper proposes a minimalist three-layer model for artificial consciousness, focusing on the emergence of self-awareness. The model comprises a Cognitive Integration Layer, a Pattern Prediction Layer, and an Instinctive Response Layer, interacting with Access-Oriented and Pattern-Integrated Memory systems. Unlike brain-replication approaches, we aim to achieve minimal self-awareness through essential elements only. Self-awareness emerges from layer interactions and dynamic self-modeling, without initial explicit self-programming. We detail each component's structure, function, and implementation strategies, addressing technical feasibility. This research offers new perspectives on consciousness emergence in artificial systems, with potential implications for human consciousness understanding and adaptable AI development. We conclude by discussing ethical considerations and future research directions.

Could an AI have conscious experiences? Any answer to this question should conform to Evidentialism - that is, it should be based not on intuition, dogma or speculation but on solid scientific evidence. I argue that such evidence is hard to come by and that the only justifiable stance on the prospects of artificial consciousness is agnosticism. In the current debate, the main division is between biological views that are sceptical of artificial consciousness and functional views that are sympathetic to it. I argue that both camps make the same mistake of over-estimating what the evidence tells us. Scientific insights into consciousness have been achieved through the study of conscious organisms. Although this has enabled cautious assessments of consciousness in various creatures, extending this to AI faces serious obstacles. AI thus presents consciousness researchers with a dilemma: either reach a verdict on artificial consciousness but violate Evidentialism; or respect Evidentialism but offer no verdict on the prospects of artificial consciousness. The dominant trend in the literature has been to take the first option while purporting to follow the scientific evidence. I argue that if we truly follow the evidence, we must take the second option and adopt agnosticism.

The concept of neural correlates of consciousness (NCC), which suggests that specific neural activities are linked to conscious experiences, has gained widespread acceptance. This acceptance is based on a wealth of evidence from experimental studies, brain imaging techniques such as fMRI and EEG, and theoretical frameworks like integrated information theory (IIT) within neuroscience and the philosophy of mind. This paper explores the potential for artificial consciousness by merging neuromorphic design and architecture with brain simulations. It proposes the Neuromorphic Correlates of Artificial Consciousness (NCAC) as a theoretical framework. While the debate on artificial consciousness remains contentious due to our incomplete grasp of consciousness, this work may raise eyebrows and invite criticism. Nevertheless, this optimistic and forward-thinking approach is fueled by insights from the Human Brain Project, advancements in brain imaging like EEG and fMRI, and recent strides in AI and computing, including quantum and neuromorphic designs. Additionally, this paper outlines how machine learning can play a role in crafting artificial consciousness, aiming to realise machine consciousness and awareness in the future.

Is artificial consciousness theoretically possible? Is it plausible? If so, is it technically feasible? To make progress on these questions, it is necessary to lay some groundwork clarifying the logical and empirical conditions for artificial consciousness to arise and the meaning of relevant terms involved. Consciousness is a polysemic word: researchers from different fields, including neuroscience, Artificial Intelligence, robotics, and philosophy, among others, sometimes use different terms in order to refer to the same phenomena or the same terms to refer to different phenomena. In fact, if we want to pursue artificial consciousness, a proper definition of the key concepts is required. Here, after some logical and conceptual preliminaries, we argue for the necessity of using dimensions and profiles of consciousness for a balanced discussion about their possible instantiation or realisation in artificial systems. Our primary goal in this paper is to review the main theoretical questions that arise in the domain of artificial consciousness. On the basis of this review, we propose to assess the issue of artificial consciousness within a multidimensional account. The theoretical possibility of artificial consciousness is already presumed within some theoretical frameworks; however, empirical possibility cannot simply be deduced from these frameworks but needs independent empirical validation. We break down the complexity of consciousness by identifying constituents, components, and dimensions, and reflect pragmatically about the general challenges confronting the creation of artificial consciousness. Despite these challenges, we outline a research strategy for showing how "awareness" as we propose to understand it could plausibly be realised in artificial systems.

Consciousness has been historically a heavily debated topic in engineering, science, and philosophy. On the contrary, awareness had less success in raising the interest of scholars in the past. However, things are changing as more and more researchers are getting interested in answering questions concerning what awareness is and how it can be artificially generated. The landscape is rapidly evolving, with multiple voices and interpretations of the concept being conceived and techniques being developed. The goal of this paper is to summarize and discuss the ones among these voices that are connected with projects funded by the EIC Pathfinder Challenge called "Awareness Inside", a nonrecurring call for proposals within Horizon Europe that was designed specifically for fostering research on natural and synthetic awareness. In this perspective, we dedicate special attention to challenges and promises of applying synthetic awareness in robotics, as the development of mature techniques in this new field is expected to have a special impact on generating more capable and trustworthy embodied systems.

Chalmers was an eminently sensible choice to speak about AI consciousness. He'd earned his PhD in philosophy at an Indiana University AI lab, where he and his computer scientist colleagues spent their breaks debating whether machines might one day have minds. In his 1996 book, The Conscious Mind, he spent an entire chapter arguing that artificial consciousness was possible. If he had been able to interact with systems like LaMDA and ChatGPT back in the '90s, before anyone knew how such a thing might work, he would have thought there was a good chance they were conscious, Chalmers says. But when he stood before a crowd of NeurIPS attendees in a cavernous New Orleans convention hall, clad in his trademark leather jacket, he offered a different assessment.