Meet the Winners of Scientific American's Great Consciousness Contest

Stand aside "Watson": We have triumphed over the machine

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In June Scientific American launched its Great Consciousness Contest intended to get readers involved in testing an idea put forward by leading neuroscientists Christof Koch and Giulio Tononi. Their article in SA's June issue, "A Test for Consciousness," postulates that slight variations in the placement of objects that occupy ordinary everyday images can completely befuddle the most sophisticated image-recognition capabilities of today's computers. Only a fully conscious machine could deduce that something is not right with this type of image.

The authors defined consciousness as the ability of a computer to make sense of generalized world knowledge that most people share: You and I know, for instance, that a photo of a keyboard in front of a computer makes sense, whereas a potted plant that replaces the input device means that something is awry. Similarly, a man in a suit inspecting his watch while floating horizontally above farmland is just plain cuckoo.

The simplicity of the idea was such that Scientific American decided to ask readers to develop their own images that could, in effect, fool a machine. The winners of the contest—judged by Koch and Tononi—are now in and we want to share their submissions with you. As you will see, all of the winners manipulated real-world objects into bizarre placements. Koch's comments accompany the images.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


So stand aside Watson. Here are three Scientific American readers who (at least from the perspective of a couple of bipeds) triumphed over the machine.

First Prize Andrew Griffith, first-prize winner, Jersey Shore, P.A.:

Christof Koch: The image, Koch says, is something you might have seen in The Matrix "once Neo wakes up. Clever. It's not impossible but in normal experience, you would never encounter anything like [it]."

Second Prize Eugene Ingram, Jr., San Jose, Calif. Christof Koch: "A photo-montage of a statue [in a pavilion] and on top of it, where we would not expect it. It's a semantic violation—that is, statues are usually not on the roof, although there are some on the Basilica in the Vatican in Rome."

Third Prize Jason Bache,  Albuquerque, N.M. Christof Koch: "This is similar in spirit to René Magritte's 'Empire of Light.' The conflict here is between the lightbulb and the sunlight. This is a semantic violation, not a physical one."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe