@Joklem and Smart Bros - Man Versus Machine - Jeopardy!

Azelma · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:12 am

Thoughts on the Matrix and Man vs. Machine? Jeopardy has an interesting experiment going on.....

Basically - IBM built a super computer that is facing off against 2 of Jeopardy's best human contestants (the man, Ken Jennings, being one of them). So far, the computer is kicking the humans' ass.

What's interesting is that it's not something like Chess, which has a finite set of rules. There's tons of wordplay/riddles involved with Jeopardy, which is what computers normally aren't that good at.

http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainme ... story.html

Quote:

according to IBM, Watson, which has been loaded with more than 200 million pages of data, analyzes clues in many different ways using its 100-plus algorithms. This gives it more than 100 possible solutions, and it then assigns a probability to each solution. If many algorithms suggest the same solution, the probability of that solution increases, and if the probability is high enough, Watson will give its answer.

Watson therefore displays no consciousness, and many computer scientists have suggested that it isn't even displaying thought or intelligence, but is merely simulating them. But this, of course, depends on what we mean by "thought" and "intelligence." So far, cognitive psychologists haven't been particularly successful in explaining how humans think, with some pessimists suggesting it is an insoluble problem -and this, in turn, has hobbled research on artificial intelligence.

What exactly is "intelligence."?

Also, on a related note - Watson missed a really easy final jeopardy question last night. The category was U.S. Cities and the question was:

"Its largest airport was named for a World War II hero; its second largest, for a World War II battle."

Clearly the answer was Chicago (O'Hare, Midway), as the two humans got correct. Watson guessed Toronto lol.

Article about how it missed the question:
http://asmarterplanet.com/blog/2011/02/ ... -clue.html

Henq · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:16 am

As posted on facebook by one of the smartest people I have ever worked with.

Quote:

am i the only person that is disappointed with watson on jeopardy? why have it physically buzz in if they didn't bother having it read its physical environment. no speech recognition and sight? no lateral combination of computer science fields...just natural language recognition done really fast. i can talk to my android phone...but I have to send a text file to a supercomputer? lame

dek · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:40 am

It's Google's "I Feel Lucky" button with speech recognition. I mean, cool and all, and probably a step up in several areas of robotics, but I'm not exactly surprised that a computer knows more than a human.

Usdk · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:10 pm

i love you henq.

all the problems in the world, and we're programming a super computer to compete on jeopardy.

once.

Weena · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:19 pm

Watson ain't got shit on me!

- Ken Jennings

Joklem · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:52 pm

Usdk wrote:

i love you henq.

all the problems in the world, and we're programming a super computer to compete on jeopardy.

once.

I'm pretty sure that Watson's only purpose is not to compete on jeopardy once. Also, scientists don't research and make things because they could be useful, they do so because it's fucking awesome. (also because it's cool, just to irritate someone)

Aestu · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:01 pm

Regurgitation of facts is not comparable to understanding of their implications. At best, this takes us a step closer to the omniscient computer on Star Trek: TNG that is merely a tool in the hands of the protagonists.

Boredalt · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:07 pm

Joklem wrote:

I'm pretty sure that Watson's only purpose is not to compete on jeopardy once.

This. In order for computers to ever truly interact with human beings (particularly multiple human beings) in any complex way, they'll need to be able to navigate nuances of language to a very high degree of accuracy. Imagine the applications.

Azelma · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:08 pm

Boredalt wrote:

This. In order for computers to ever truly interact with human beings (particularly multiple human beings) in any complex way, they'll need to be able to navigate nuances of language to a very high degree of accuracy. Imagine the applications.

People have high hopes for what this could mean for medical diagnosis.

Usdk · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:13 pm

I hope they name it Femputer.

Yuratuhl · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 6:25 pm

Sight/vision is a different type of machine learning. Watson was built to answer questions effectively, not to have eyes.

dek · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:27 pm

Aestu wrote:

At best, this takes us a step closer to the omniscient computer on Star Trek: TNG that is merely a tool in the hands of the protagonists.

Which is EXACTLY what I want.

Necrachilles · **Posted:** Thu Feb 17, 2011 12:42 am

Somehow I read the title as "@Joklem and Smash Bros"
Stopped reading there
Came in
Was disappointed =[

However I did see said episode of Jeopordy and it didn't seem all that impressive/fair. Would have been better if them bros had John Henry'd that brobot.

Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

@Joklem and Smart Bros - Man Versus Machine - Jeopardy!

Who is online