Coffeehouse Thread

14 posts

IBM employing Watson in new fields

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    Bass

    Thought this was a bit interesting.

  • User profile image
    SteveRichter

    Isn't search Google's area of expertise?  Is search any better than it was 10 years ago?  Does not seem like it.

     

  • User profile image
    Bass

    , SteveRichter wrote

    Isn't search Google's area of expertise?  Is search any better than it was 10 years ago?  Does not seem like it.

    Trying to achieve different things. Google is trying to get answers quickly and with minimal computational resources, while Watson can take its time and use far greater computational resources per query.

  • User profile image
    exoteric

    Nice video. Here's Stephen Wolfram's take on Watson with a comparison to Wolfram|Alpha:

    Jeopardy, IBM and Wolfram|Alpha

    @SteveRichter: Search engines are also evolving, now scraping for knowledge and concepts (see http://schema.org/) (and probably trying to infer it a la PowerSet (absorbed by the collective) and Evi (formerly True Knowledge)).

    Just for fun, I asked Evi and Wolfram|Alpha:

    "What is the first name of the prime minister of Denmark?"

    Evi gave the names of the last two. Wolfram|Alpha almost appeared to understand it but came up with an empty result set. It's pretty cool to expand and see Evi's chain of reasoning.

  • User profile image
    Proton2

    "

    What Is Watson?

    In a nutshell, Watson is an impressive demonstration of the current state of the art in artificial intelligence: a computer's ability to answer questions posed in natural language (text or speech) correctly.

    Watson came out of the IBM DeepQA Project and is an application of DeepQA tuned specifically to Jeopardy (a US TV trivia game show). The "QA" in DeepQA stands for Question Answering, which means the computer can answer your questions, spoken in a human language (starting with English). The "Deep" in DeepQA means the computer is able to analyze deeply enough to handle natural language text and speech successfully. Because natural language is unstructured, deep analysis is required to interpret it correctly.

    It demonstrates (in a popular format) a computer's capability to interface with us using natural language, to "understand" and answer questions correctly by quickly searching a vast sea of data and correctly picking out the vital facts that answer the question.

    Watson is thousands of algorithms running on thousands of cores using terabytes of memory, driving teraflops of CPU operations to deliver an answer to a natural language question in less than five seconds. It is an exciting feat of technology, and it's just a taste of what's to come.

    IBM's goal for the DeepQA Project is to drive automatic Question Answering technology to a point where it clearly and consistently rivals the best human performance."

    http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/system-administration-ibm-watson-supercomputer

     

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    , Proton2 wrote

    "

    What Is Watson?

    In a nutshell, Watson is an impressive demonstration of the current state of the art in artificial intelligence: a computer's ability to answer questions posed in natural language (text or speech) correctly.

    Watson came out of the IBM DeepQA Project and is an application of DeepQA tuned specifically to Jeopardy (a US TV trivia game show). The "QA" in DeepQA stands for Question Answering, which means the computer can answer your questions, spoken in a human language (starting with English). The "Deep" in DeepQA means the computer is able to analyze deeply enough to handle natural language text and speech successfully. Because natural language is unstructured, deep analysis is required to interpret it correctly.

    It demonstrates (in a popular format) a computer's capability to interface with us using natural language, to "understand" and answer questions correctly by quickly searching a vast sea of data and correctly picking out the vital facts that answer the question.

    Watson is thousands of algorithms running on thousands of cores using terabytes of memory, driving teraflops of CPU operations to deliver an answer to a natural language question in less than five seconds. It is an exciting feat of technology, and it's just a taste of what's to come.

    IBM's goal for the DeepQA Project is to drive automatic Question Answering technology to a point where it clearly and consistently rivals the best human performance."

    http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/system-administration-ibm-watson-supercomputer

     

     

    I read about something like this and I say that we are missing something.

    unless the human brain has even more cpu power than all that hardware then the current approach to computers is way off course.  I also think of the small scale, very small insects with very few neurons in their whole body are able to fly, to forage and to survive.   they do a lot with very little cpu power.

    So perhaps binary based systems are not the long term answer? DNA is not base 2 for example.

    I think we should learn how to make a functioning bot that has the smallest amount of parts.

    work on making a "Watson" that runs on no more than the energy that a human body produces.

    and fits in a 12 inch cube sized space.  then we are getting close to the dream.

  • User profile image
    Dr Herbie

    , figuerres wrote

    *snip*

     I also think of the small scale, very small insects with very few neurons in their whole body are able to fly, to forage and to survive.   they do a lot with very little cpu power.

    Actually in many insects the movements are not conscious -- e.g. Cockroaches use hairs at their tails to detect air currents (such as a human foot coming down on them) and their nervous systems autonomously make then run away to escape -- making a simple robot to do this is more about the hardware to detect the air currents than the logic required to trigger the running response.

    Herbie

  • User profile image
    SteveRichter

    , Dr Herbie wrote

    *snip*

    Actually in many insects the movements are not conscious -- e.g. Cockroaches use hairs at their tails to detect air currents (such as a human foot coming down on them) and their nervous systems autonomously make then run away to escape

    not disputing this but interesting that more evolved animals like mammals and humans dropped this feature of their nervous system making independent decisions. Does a mammal feel pain if the pain signal does not reach the brain? If not, why would evolution drop that ability from the feature set? And why not enhance the nervous system even further, kind of an implementation of multi core processing in the evolved being?  For example, enhance the insect "feel the air current" feature by adding the ability to see things as well.

     

  • User profile image
    Dr Herbie

    @SteveRichter: Well, evolution just causes relative improvements to what went before, so it's more a case of  'close enough is good enough' in engineering terms.  In the specific case of cockroaches, the autonomous reaction is far faster than a 'thought' one could possibly be.  However, we could also say that AI is evolving -- they've passed what a cockroach is capable of and they're moving up the complexity scale ...

    Herbie

  • User profile image
    exoteric

    , figuerres wrote

    unless the human brain has even more cpu power than all that hardware then the current approach to computers is way off course.  I also think of the small scale, very small insects with very few neurons in their whole body are able to fly, to forage and to survive.   they do a lot with very little cpu power.

    I don't believe the computational capabilities of (non-artificial) neural networks are fully understood. Some state that there might even be computation within individual neurons.

     

     

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    , exoteric wrote

    *snip*

    I don't believe the computational capabilities of (non-artificial) neural networks are fully understood. Some state that there might even be computation within individual neurons.

     

     

     

    when you say that are you talking about computation in a biologic neuron ?

    I think that is what you mean , just want to be sure.

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    , Dr Herbie wrote

    *snip*

    Actually in many insects the movements are not conscious -- e.g. Cockroaches use hairs at their tails to detect air currents (such as a human foot coming down on them) and their nervous systems autonomously make then run away to escape -- making a simple robot to do this is more about the hardware to detect the air currents than the logic required to trigger the running response.

    Herbie

    that's fine - I said "neurons in the whole body"  I am thinking of the total network and it's power, not how it is organized / what the "architecture" is  if the setup is non - centralized and does a good job then we can learn why and how it works and what the limits are.

     

  • User profile image
    Bass

    IIRC, Kurzweil thinks we'll have the computational resources to emulate the human brain on a supercomputer in a few decades.

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    , Bass wrote

    IIRC, Kurzweil thinks we'll have the computational resources to emulate the human brain on a supercomputer in a few decades.

    Maybe, but IIRC, Kurzweil makes a lot of stuff up.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.