Skip to main content

Common Sense, The Turing Test and the Quest for Real AI - Hector Levesque *****

It was fascinating to read this book immediately after Ed Finn's What Algorithms Want. They are both by academics on aspects of artificial intelligence (AI) - but where reading Finn's book is like wading through intellectual treacle, this is a delight. It is short, to the point, beautifully clear and provides just as much in the way of insights without any of the mental anguish.

The topic here is the nature of artificial intelligence, why the current dominant approach of adaptive machine learning can never deliver true AI and what the potential consequences are of thinking that learning from big data is sufficient to truly act in a smart fashion.

As Hector Levesque points out, machine learning is great at handling everyday non-exceptional circumstances - but falls down horribly when having to deal with the 'long tail', where there won't be much past data to learn from. For example (my examples, not his), a self-driving car might cope wonderfully with typical traffic and roads, but get into a serious mess if a deer tries to cross the motorway in front of it, or should the car encounter Swindon's Magic Roundabout.

There is so much here to love. Although the book is compact (and rather expensive for its size), each chapter delivers excellent considerations. Apart from the different kinds of AI (I love that knowledge-based AI has the acronym of GOFAI for 'good old-fashioned AI'), this takes us into considerations of how the brain works, the difference between real and fake intelligence, learning and experience, symbols and symbol processing and far more. Just to give one small example of something that intrigued me, Levesque gives the example of a very simple computer program that generates quite a complex outcome. He then envisages taking the kind of approaches we use to try to understand human intelligence - both psychological and physiological - showing how doing the same thing with this far simpler computer equivalent would fail to uncover what was happening behind the outputs.

For too long, those of us who take an interest in AI have been told that the 'old-fashioned' knowledge-based approach was a dead end, while the modern adaptive machine learning approach, which is the way that, for instance, programs like Siri and Alexa appear to understand English, is the way forward. But as the self-driving car example showed above, anything providing true AI has to be reliable and predictable to be able to cope with odd and relatively unlikely circumstances - because while any individual unlikely occurrence will probably never happen, the chances are that something unlikely will come along. And when it does, it takes knowledge to select the most appropriate action.

Highly recommended.

Hardback:  

Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin Five Way Interview

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin (born in 1999) is a distinguished composer, concert pianist, music theorist and researcher. Three of his piano CDs have been released in Germany. He started his undergraduate degree at the age of 13 in Kazakhstan, and having completed three musical doctorates in prominent Italian music institutions at the age of 20, he has mastered advanced composition techniques. In 2024 he completed a PhD in music at the University of St Andrews / Royal Conservatoire of Scotland (researching timbre-texture co-ordinate in avant- garde music), and was awarded The Silver Medal of The Worshipful Company of Musicians, London. He has held visiting affiliations at the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and UCL, and has been lecturing and giving talks internationally since the age of 13. His latest book is Quantum Mechanics and Avant Garde Music . What links quantum physics and avant-garde music? The entire book is devoted to this question. To put it briefly, there are many different link...

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on...

Should we question science?

I was surprised recently by something Simon Singh put on X about Sabine Hossenfelder. I have huge admiration for Simon, but I also have a lot of respect for Sabine. She has written two excellent books and has been helpful to me with a number of physics queries - she also had a really interesting blog, and has now become particularly successful with her science videos. This is where I'm afraid she lost me as audience, as I find video a very unsatisfactory medium to take in information - but I know it has mass appeal. This meant I was concerned by Simon's tweet (or whatever we are supposed to call posts on X) saying 'The Problem With Sabine Hossenfelder: if you are a fan of SH... then this is worth watching.' He was referencing a video from 'Professor Dave Explains' - I'm not familiar with Professor Dave (aka Dave Farina, who apparently isn't a professor, which is perhaps a bit unfortunate for someone calling out fakes), but his videos are popular and he...