![]() ![]() ![]() Put simply, “Weak human + machine + better process was superior to a strong computer alone and, more remarkably, superior to a strong human + machine + inferior process.” As leaders look at how to incorporate AI into their organizations, they’ll have to manage expectations as AI is introduced, invest in bringing teams together and perfecting processes, and refine their own leadership abilities. What he discovered was that having the best players and the best program was less a predictor of success than having a really good process. Want More Tech News Subscribe to ComputingEdge Newsletter Today Broadly speaking, we can divide artificial intelligence into four large groups. After losing to IBM’s Deep Blue, he began to experiment how a computer helper changed players’ competitive advantage in high-level chess games. Lost in this debate is the fact that artificial intelligence is a field with many different points of view and that many researchers aim to enhance human productivity rather than replace human beings. Chess Grandmaster Garry Kasparov offers some unique insight here. The real question is: how can human intelligence work with artificial intelligence to produce augmented intelligence. People and AI both bring different abilities and strengths to the table. Persuasion machine creators who conceal that fact should be held liable for any harm they cause.Will smart machines really replace human workers? Probably not. expert Stuart Russell rightly tells Nature that people have the right to know whether they are interacting with a machine, especially when it is trying to influence them. "One day," the journal suggested, such systems will be able to "create persuasive language with stronger oratorical ability and recourse to emotive appeals-both of which are known to be more effective than facts and logic in gaining attention and winning converts, especially for false claims." Slonim and his colleagues report that expert analysts, who read transcripts without knowing which side was human, thought that Project Debater gave a "decent performance" but that the human debaters generally were more persuasive.Īn April Nature editorial, however, predicted that computational argumentation will improve. That contrast is not surprising, since Project Debater had access to millions of articles during her 15 minutes of preparation, while Natarajan had to rely more on general principles. Natarajan largely counters with principled arguments, calling attention to opportunity costs (paying for this good thing means not paying for that other, perhaps better thing) and arguing that politics inevitably will target subsidies to favored groups. The YouTube video and transcript of the debate show Project Debater fluently marshaling an impressive amount of research data in support of that proposition. In one contest before a live audience, Project Debater went against 2016 World Universities Debating Championship grand finalist Harish Natarajan on the motion that the government should subsidize preschool. Each side got 15 minutes to prepare once the topic was chosen. Kubrick labored for decades to hone the script for A.I. and challenges, which have so far outpaced policy debates and regulatory frameworks. Project Debater was paired with three champion human debaters in parliamentary-style public debates, with both sides offering four-minute opening statements, four-minute rebuttals, and two-minute closing statements. 20 3.4 How can education prepare humans to live and work with AI. The debate construction module filters and chooses the arguments deemed most relevant and persuasive. The rebuttal module matches objections to the points made by the other side. The argument knowledge base deploys general debating principles. The argument mining module accesses 400 million recent newspaper articles. She didn't win, but that could change.Īs her developers explain in a March Nature article, Project Debater's computational argumentation technology consists of four main modules. The AI, called Project Debater, appeared on stage in a. In a contest against champion human debaters, Slonim's Project Debater, which speaks with a female voice, impressed the judges. It was man 1, machine 1 in the first live, public debate between an artificial intelligence system developed by IBM and two human debaters. ![]() An IBM team led by artificial intelligence (A.I.) researcher Noam Slonim has devised a system that does not merely answer questions it debates the questioners. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |