|
On February 15 2011 13:39 Lucid90 wrote:
I can make this program in 5 minutes.
Step 1: upload some software that will understand human voice
Step 2: google the question because it's a fucking computer. You can just stick a tiny usb stick that connects to the internet underneath all those layers of computers.
Step 3: write the code that will make the computer pick the most likely answer
congradulations IBM, you now have marketed your products to an even greater audience.
i know the secret to eternal life
Step 1: don't get hit by a bus
Step 2: eat fucking vegetables and shit
Step 3: cure aging
congradulations was it that hard?? y doesnt ibm do this
|
On February 15 2011 13:39 Lucid90 wrote:
I can make this program in 5 minutes.
Step 1: upload some software that will understand human voice
Step 2: google the question because it's a fucking computer. You can just stick a tiny usb stick that connects to the internet underneath all those layers of computers.
Step 3: write the code that will make the computer pick the most likely answer
congradulations IBM, you now have marketed your products to an even greater audience.
Please educate yourself by watching that 20 minute video on the process of Watson's decision making.
|
On February 15 2011 14:30 mytent wrote:
Um..
This Is just a normal computer on steroids. Thats it.
It's not a true learning computer. Just a powerful, well programmer one. It's a big gimmick, that's all it can ever be.
Skynet? Ha!
Yeah right..
You have no idea, I am not sure how well they accomplished it, but it being able to actually even reasonably compete is big achievement. Natural language processing and actual(even if partial) "understanding" of text is pretty hard task. Also define learning computer before stating it is not learning.
|
On February 15 2011 13:39 Lucid90 wrote:
I can make this program in 5 minutes.
Step 1: upload some software that will understand human voice
Step 2: google the question because it's a fucking computer. You can just stick a tiny usb stick that connects to the internet underneath all those layers of computers.
Step 3: write the code that will make the computer pick the most likely answer
congradulations IBM, you now have marketed your products to an even greater audience.
Even first step is extremely hard not yet solved problem, so lol at you saying it will take 5 minutes.
As for the second try googling Jeopardy questions and see what you get, mostly nothing relevant. Step 3 is also extremely hard to do well on such a broad domain.
|
Does Watson actually have to interpret the host's speech in order to understand the question? If so, that's pretty damn impressive. However, I imagine if the questions focused more on linguistic subtleties, humor and abstract concepts it wouldn't fare nearly as well as a human.
I wonder how long it will take for the technology and AI that powers Watson to be small enough to fit in a smartphone. Can you imagine having your own portable genius that can instantly answer any random question you verbally ask it? The potential for such technology is difficult to fully imagine.
edit: I also love all the pseudo-programmers who believe that Watson is nothing more than a glorified search engine when they clearly have no idea what Watson really is or what it took to develop.
|
I was gonna go to this down at LC, but ended up not on account of an algorithms T.A. session. FML 
|
Update, after the first full round Watson is tied for first with $5000. Round 2 and 3 are still to air. You can watch them during Jeopardy's timeslot on tv in the US Tuesday and Wednesday night.
|
On February 15 2011 15:08 popnyah wrote:
Does Watson actually have to interpret the host's speech in order to understand the question? If so, that's pretty damn impressive. However, I imagine if the questions focused more on linguistic subtleties, humor and abstract concepts it wouldn't fare nearly as well as a human.
I wonder how long it will take for the technology and AI that powers Watson to be small enough to fit in a smartphone. Can you imagine having your own portable genius that can instantly answer any random question you verbally ask it? The potential for such technology is difficult to fully imagine.
edit: I also love all the pseudo-programmers who believe that Watson is nothing more than a glorified search engine when they clearly have no idea what Watson really is or what it took to develop.
Just ignore them they are likely doing nothing more then inciting an out raged response to the oversimplification of a complex system that took years to create and some very talented people over at IBM. To say that the task is easy just from that statement alone would be just a show to how incompetent they are. I'm more interested in the word play questions and if they will do a little bit onto the questions that Watson had trouble with esp the ones that it missed.
|
5930 Posts
On February 15 2011 15:08 popnyah wrote:
Does Watson actually have to interpret the host's speech in order to understand the question? If so, that's pretty damn impressive. However, I imagine if the questions focused more on linguistic subtleties, humor and abstract concepts it wouldn't fare nearly as well as a human.
I wonder how long it will take for the technology and AI that powers Watson to be small enough to fit in a smartphone. Can you imagine having your own portable genius that can instantly answer any random question you verbally ask it? The potential for such technology is difficult to fully imagine.
edit: I also love all the pseudo-programmers who believe that Watson is nothing more than a glorified search engine when they clearly have no idea what Watson really is or what it took to develop.
Yes and no, it can't actually understand speech (come back in 10 years Watson when you can actually understand speech so you don't repeat wrong answers) but it does interpret and analyse the answer.
Instead of using specialised databases for Jeopardy, it uses alogarithms to break down text and attempts to find the subject matter, verbs, grammar, etc. From there correlates and interrelates words and phrases so it can make confidence percentages (Jeopardy displays this as the answer panel) and hypotheses. Basically it can "learn" by itself in a very primative way and if it gets something wrong it goes "oh I'm wrong, these sets of words can be used in this way!" and changes its confidences and construct possibly more accurate hypotheses.
|
On February 15 2011 15:15 NEOtheONE wrote:
Update, after the first full round Watson is tied for first with $5000. Round 2 and 3 are still to air. You can watch them during Jeopardy's timeslot on tv in the US Tuesday and Wednesday night.
Little bit of a correction, they're going to play 2 full games over the course of 3 days, and they only played Round 1 of Game 1 on Monday, likely they will play Rounds 2 and 3 (Double and Final Jeopardy) tonight, and the entirety of Game 3 on Wednesday.
|
At first I was very disappointed to learn that Watson could not understand speech. My first reaction was something like "couldn't they install a 10$ speech-to-text software on that thing and call it a day?"
I realize now that not only would this give him a significant disadvantage (other contestants can read the answers on the board) but requires him to distinguish answers from anything else said on the show. It's more complexity for no real reason.
I was looking forward to having Alex interview Watson about where he was born and if he understands human emotions. Oh well.
|
Just watched it. Pretty impressive stuff. Will be amazing when they come out with "DeepQA" software like that on the internet ala Google but much better.
|
Speech recognition is a COMPLETELY different program from what they are trying to develop. It's amazing how many people fail to realize this.
|
Canada3116 Posts
Getting a computer to understand is very hard. If you type an abstract, never before asked question into google, imagine what you'd find for pages. Probably almost nothing relating to the question, much less an answer.
Watson has an advantage in that it's reflexes are instantaneous, where as a human will take time to press the button from when he realizes he knows the answer. But that doesn't always make up for the lack of real comprehension.
I forgot this was airing until half an hour after it was over. I'll make sure to watch it today and tomorrow.
|
On February 16 2011 03:21 ThaZenith wrote:
Watson has an advantage in that it's reflexes are instantaneous, where as a human will take time to press the button from when he realizes he knows the answer. But that doesn't always make up for the lack of real comprehension.
it's not as different as you think. a human can take less time for the answer, or more, depending on the way their brain is wired. humans also have mental reflexes that are "instantaneous"
|
The thing is, humans win this challenge no matter what. as said in the 20 minute video in the OP, all it takes is a tuna sandwich and a glass or water to power a human brain that can fit in a shoebox. compare that to what it takes Watson to compete, humans win every time.
|
|
|
Canada3116 Posts
On February 16 2011 03:25 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2011 03:21 ThaZenith wrote:
Watson has an advantage in that it's reflexes are instantaneous, where as a human will take time to press the button from when he realizes he knows the answer. But that doesn't always make up for the lack of real comprehension.
it's not as different as you think. a human can take less time for the answer, or more, depending on the way their brain is wired. humans also have mental reflexes that are "instantaneous"
Ummm, by reflexes, I'm referring to the fact that it takes a human body to react. A delay of .15s may not sound like alot, but in terms of a computer where his delay is basically the speed of light, it makes a different.
Of coarse "searching" speeds for information would be different in different cases.
|
On February 16 2011 03:25 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2011 03:21 ThaZenith wrote:
Watson has an advantage in that it's reflexes are instantaneous, where as a human will take time to press the button from when he realizes he knows the answer. But that doesn't always make up for the lack of real comprehension.
it's not as different as you think. a human can take less time for the answer, or more, depending on the way their brain is wired. humans also have mental reflexes that are "instantaneous"
I'm pretty sure Watson's buzzer reaction is much much faster than human muscle reaction. However, the information processing that takes place in human brains is our advantage. Watson may have more data and facts stored, but its search and recall algorithm can't possibly be more robust (this does not necessarily mean slower) than the human brain's.
|
On February 16 2011 03:27 metaphoR wrote:
The thing is, humans win this challenge no matter what. as said in the 20 minute video in the OP, all it takes is a tuna sandwich and a glass or water to power a human brain that can fit in a shoebox. compare that to what it takes Watson to compete, humans win every time.
Thats what they said about the technology needed to send people into orbit, which they did with the equivalent of a modern day graphing calculator. It's only a matter of time until the hardware gets faster and smaller.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
