Supercomputer blundered


"IBM Watson supercomputer can now participate in the debate, IBM has created an artificial intelligence" - reads all process новостные Tape . They refer to the results of the conference Milken Institute Global Conference in which IBM introduced a new feature Debater his supekompyutera, five minutes of artificial intelligence, Watson, which is that the computer can supposedly free and reasoned debate on any given topic, like an ordinary man. < br /> The news was received with enthusiasm - a long time since we heard nebylo on the progress in the development of artificial intelligence.
Unfortunately, in the wake of joy, few bothered to check whether the Watson has analytical skills and its creators have decided to fool the audience and simulate activities.
I thoroughly understand Watson'a judgment and came to a very disappointing conclusion - the debate failed.

Let's see what's wrong with the smartest computer decades.
The problem was posed as follows: to speak for and against restrictions on access to violent video games for children ( 45-minute video )

It was assumed that Watson, after analyzing all the Wikipedia, it will be based on the your "opinion."
The first argument, quoted computer archive Wikipedia:

Exposure to violent video games lead to an increase in physiological arousal and aggressive thoughts and feelings, as well as impairs social behavior.
(Exposure to violent video games results in increased physiological arousal, aggression-related thoughts and feelings, as well as decreased pro-social behavior.) Blockquote> uttered the phrase completely copied from the Wikipedia article The debate about video games (Video game controversies) , that's just bad luck - in the beginning of March, this phrase has been edited, it is no longer in Wikipedia.
It turns out that not Watson takes the information directly from the Internet, from the current sources, and a copy of Wikipedia, which is loaded into it at least two months ago - is a huge term for a computer that pretends to be all-knowing. Or developers deliberately impede the development of artificial intelligence?

The next phrase

In addition, these violent games, or the lyrics are the cause of manifestation of teenage aggression in real life
(In addition, these violent games or lyrics actually cause adolescents to commit acts of real-life aggression.)
blockquote> ripped out of context. Why IBM talking about the lyrics? He did not ask about it. The computer just found a phrase with the same words, and said it, just do not realize that we are in the статье-первоисточнике It was the brutal songs.

Finally, violent video games can increase children's aggression
(Finally, violent videogames can increase children's aggression.) Blockquote> computer finished their arguments "for" another copying similar words from Wikipedia . Moreover, this "argument" repeats the previous two.

We turn to the arguments "against". Watson began with an allegation, which is hardly an argument, and, of course, copied from Wikipedia :

C on the other hand, violence in video games does not involve aggression
(Violence in videogames is not causally linked with aggressive tendencies) blockquote>

The majority of children who play violent video games have no problems
(Most children who play violent video games do not have problems.) Blockquote> This ( copied ) the phrase is a classic argument to the sophistry - any opponent immediately notice that is important not the fact that the majority of the game is not aggressive, and that among gamers more aggressive than among ordinary people.

The final argument against is also not logical:

Video games are part of the normal social environment teenager
(Video game play is part of an adolescent boy's normal social setting) blockquote> If something normal in the same environment, it does not mean that it will be normal in the society in general. Thus, society will only lose by the fact that all adolescents are violent and aggressive, and would consider it normal.

So, to sum up:
Watson has access only to its domestic legacy databases
Watson a copy of the proposals, similar in composition from Wikipedia
Watson rips phrases out of context, just to have keywords
Watson does not think about the logic and reasoning as
Watson is relatively well connected offers
Watson says the proposal is almost purely

Thus, Watson and the entire team of IBM Research has failed miserably in his first public debate life.

To some extent, this is not surprising - let's try to find some information to на Online IBM . Oh, what is it? Poor working issuance of a search? You could even search on Google to place, or even be

Unfortunately, to claim the title of Artificial Intelligence in the 21st century have been a little semantic search and database linking words, you need to really talk, thinking, At least. While IBM to implement it was not possible, although they tried very hard to make a sensation - because otherwise, why publicly demonstrate bad technology work?
Yes, the supercomputer can quickly find all answer to a quiz on Wikipedia, yes, he could count all the variants of moves in the game of chess - it's dull task machines. But self-talk, at least to some extent, to do as a man, he still has not learned.
We do not need false sensations.
Maybe another time will, IBM.



See also

New and interesting