Making inferences from behaviour to cognition is problematic due to a many-to-one mapping problem, in which any one behaviour can be generated by multiple possible cognitive processes. Attempts to cross this inferential gap when comparing human intelligence to that of animals or machines can generate great debate. Here, we discuss the challenges of making comparisons using ‘success-testing’ approaches and call attention to an alternate experimental framework, the ‘signature-testing’ approach. Signature testing places the search for information-processing errors, biases, and other patterns centre stage, rather than focussing predominantly on problem-solving success. We highlight current research on both biological and artificial intelligence that fits within this framework and is creating proactive research programs that make strong inferences about the similarities and differences between the content of human, animal, and machine minds.

由于多对一映射问题，从行为到认知进行推断是有问题的，其中任何一种行为都可以由多个可能的认知过程产生。在将人类智能与动物或机器的智能进行比较时，试图跨越这一推理鸿沟可能会引发激烈的争论。在这里，我们讨论了使用“成功测试”方法进行比较的挑战，并提请注意另一种实验框架，即“签名测试”方法。签名测试将搜索信息处理错误、偏见和其他模式置于中心位置，而不是主要关注解决问题的成功。