Which speech act uses require AI/intentionality vs which do not?

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• Many uses of speech acts do not require human-level intelligence for programs to perform them.claim0.831
  Key contention of paper: Elephant 2000 can support varying levels of AI capability without requiring full human intelligence.
• Speech acts are necessary in common sense informatic situations where agents with different goals and knowledge interact.claim0.803
  McCarthy's fundamental position: most important features of speech acts are independent of whether agents are human or machine.
• Human use of speech acts involves intelligence. Elephant 2000 is on the borderline of AI, but the article emphasizes the Elephant usages that do not require AI.claim0.791
  Seventh abstract claim.
• Many speech act properties are independent of whether the agent is human or machine.claim0.781
• Many kinds of human speech act are relative to social institutions that change, and the exchange of speech acts among computer programs will often involve the design of new institutions prescribing the effects of speech acts.claim0.777
  Claim about designing institutions for program speech acts.
• What must be true in order that a speech act of a given kind be successfully performed?question0.765
  Key question shared with philosophers about successful speech acts.
• We may need to consider joint speech acts such as making an agreement.hypothesis0.750
  Speculation about future extensions.
• The only human oversight is provided through a list of rules or principles, and so we refer to the method as 'Constitutional AI'.quote0.736
  Defines the core concept of the paper.