Skip to main content

Human-Centered AI - Ben Shneiderman ****

Reading some popular science books is like biting into a luscious peach. Others are more like being presented with an almond - you have to do a lot of work to get through a difficult shell to get to the bit you want. This is very much an almond of a book, but it's worth the effort.

At the time of writing, two popular science topics have become so ubiquitous that it's hard to find anything new to say about them - neuroscience and artificial intelligence. Almost all the (many) AI books I've read have either been paeans to its wonders or dire warnings of how AI will take over the world or make opaque and biassed decisions that destroy lives. What is really refreshing about Ben Shneiderman's book is that it does neither of these - instead it provides an approach to benefit from AI without suffering the negative consequences. That's why it's an important piece of work.

To do this, Shneiderman takes us right back to the philosophical contrast between rationalism and empiricism. Rationalism, we discover, is driven by rules, logic and well-defined boundaries. Empiricists drive their understanding from observation of the real world where things are more fuzzy. Shneiderman then expands this distinction to that between science and innovation. Here, science is seen on focussing on the the essence of what is happening, while innovation is driven by applications. 

When we get to AI, Shneiderman argues that many AI researchers take the science approach - they want to understand how people think and to reproduce human-like intelligence in computers and human-like robots. The empirical, innovation-driven AI researchers, meanwhile, focus on ways that AI can not duplicate and supplant human abilities, but support them. It's the difference between providing a human replacement and an AI-driven super tool that enables the human to work far better. Although Shneiderman makes an effort to portray both sides fairly, there is no doubt that he comes down strongly on the empirical, innovation-driven side - human-centred AI. It is exploring this distinction that makes the book important. Shneiderman argues convincingly that we need to move from AI taking decisions and actions, replacing humans, to human-centred AI that augments human abilities.

Quite a lot of this is driven by the importance of the human-computer interface. Science-driven AI tends to have poor or non-existent user interface, with the AI's processes opaque and impossible to control, where innovation driven-AI puts a lot of importance on having meaningful controls and interface. It's frustrating, then, that someone so strong on good user interface produces a book that has such a bad one - instead of the narrative structure of good writing, Human-Centred AI has the dire, rigid structure of a business book or textbook. We get sections with an opening summary, then an introductory chapter that tells you what the section is going to tell you, then a bit of useful content, before a closing chapter that summarises the section. There is so much repetition of the basic points that it becomes really irritating. The interface of cameras on smartphones, for example, are used as exemplars almost word for word many times over. 

The useful content could be covered in a couple of magazine articles - yet when you hit the good stuff it is really good stuff. This is by no means the best way of putting the information across - nevertheless, by dint of this valuable message, it is one of the most important AI books of the last few years.

Hardback: 
Bookshop.org

  

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

God: the Science, the Evidence - Michel-Yves Bolloré and Olivier Bonnassies ***

This is, to say the least, an oddity, but a fascinating one. A translation of a French bestseller, it aims to put forward an examination of the scientific evidence for the existence of a deity… and various other things, as this is a very oddly structured book (more on that in a moment). In The God Delusion , Richard Dawkins suggested that we should treat the existence of God as a scientific claim, which is exactly what the authors do reasonably well in the main part of the book. They argue that three pieces of scientific evidence in particular are supportive of the existence of a (generic) creator of the universe. These are that the universe had a beginning, the fine tuning of natural constants and the unlikeliness of life.  To support their evidence, Bolloré and Bonnassies give a reasonable introduction to thermodynamics and cosmology. They suggest that the expected heat death of the universe implies a beginning (for good thermodynamic reasons), and rightly give the impression tha...

The Infinite Alphabet - Cesar Hidalgo ****

Although taking a very new approach, this book by a physicist working in economics made me nostalgic for the business books of the 1980s. More on why in a moment, but Cesar Hidalgo sets out to explain how it is knowledge - how it is developed, how it is managed and forgotten - that makes the difference between success and failure. When I worked for a corporate in the 1980s I was very taken with Tom Peters' business books such of In Search of Excellence (with Robert Waterman), which described what made it possible for some companies to thrive and become huge while others failed. (It's interesting to look back to see a balance amongst the companies Peters thought were excellent, with successes such as Walmart and Intel, and failures such as Wang and Kodak.) In a similar way, Hidalgo uses case studies of successes and failures for both businesses and countries in making effective use of knowledge to drive economic success. When I read a Tom Peters book I was inspired and fired up...

The War on Science - Lawrence Krauss (Ed.) ****

At first glance this might appear to be yet another book on how to deal with climate change deniers and the like, such as How to Talk to a Science Denier.   It is, however, a much more significant book because it addresses the way that universities, government and pressure groups have attempted to undermine the scientific process. Conceptually I would give it five stars, but it's quite heavy going because it's a collection of around 18 essays by different academics, with many going over the same ground, so there is a lot of repetition. Even so, it's an important book. There are a few well-known names here - editor Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker - but also a range of scientists (with a few philosophers) explaining how science is being damaged in academia by unscientific ideas. Many of the issues apply to other disciplines as well, but this is specifically about the impact on science, and particularly important there because of the damage it has been doing...