Slashdot Mirror
IBM Computer Program To Take On 'Jeopardy!'
longacre writes "I.B.M. plans to announce Monday that it is in the final stages of completing a computer program to compete against human 'Jeopardy!' contestants. If the program beats the humans, the field of artificial intelligence will have made a leap forward. ... The team is aiming not at a true thinking machine but at a new class of software that can 'understand' human questions and respond to them correctly. Such a program would have enormous economic implications. ... The proposed contest is an effort by I.B.M. to prove that its researchers can make significant technical progress by picking "grand challenges" like its early chess foray. The new bid is based on three years of work by a team that has grown to 20 experts in fields like natural language processing, machine learning and information retrieval. ... Under the rules of the match that the company has negotiated with the 'Jeopardy!' producers, the computer will not have to emulate all human qualities. It will receive questions as electronic text. The human contestants will both see the text of each question and hear it spoken by the show's host, Alex Trebek. ... Mr. Friedman added that they were also thinking about whom the human contestants should be and were considering inviting Ken Jennings, the 'Jeopardy!' contestant who won 74 consecutive times and collected $2.52 million in 2004."
Sources say the code-name for IBM's project is "Connery".
Trebek : This nobleman is believed to have written many of Shakespeare's works.
"Connery" : [pause] So that's your game, is it, Trebek? I was a coveted performer among the brothel ladies while you were still pissing your knee-pants, boy.
Trebek : Can one of the IBM people fix the computer?
"Connery" : Your mother's a whore. But don't feel badly, Trebek. She's not a very good one. Ha ha, ha ha!
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
Anyone else hearing "I Lost on Jeopardy" in their heads at the moment?
That guy will beat anyone.
The problem they might run into is the speed of pressing the button to respond. I would imagine the computer would be able to beat the human every time it knew the answer.
FTA: The team is aiming not at a true thinking machine but at a new class of software that can 'understand' human questions and respond to them correctly.
I feel like someone should tell them how Jeopardy works... That thing isn't going to have too many questions to respond to.
Except at the "meet the contestant" part, maybe, which by the way should be fascinating.
Parsing the questions in natural language, which is the goal here, is however very much *not* trivial. Doubly so since the clues and questions in a Jeopardy! game are usually at least somewhat obfuscated, contain puns, double entendres, etc...
Anyone else hearing "I Lost on Jeopardy" in their heads at the moment?
Now I am. Thanks for that. Jerk.
According to TFA, the machine will get its questions as machine-readable text. The other human contestants will get it as text and audio. Also, the machine will not be connected to the internet.
Go somewhere random
Comment removed based on user account deletion
After years of trying to kill John Connors, Skynet realized its failure to achieve victory through brute strength and went back in time with a new objective: to win all human gameshows and use the prize money to buy off the entire planet instead.
Doubly so since the clues and questions in a Jeopardy! game are usually at least somewhat obfuscated, contain puns, double entendres, etc...
This is exactly why this sounds so implausible to me. You often have to take the category name and weave it in with the question (or rather, answer). A lot depends not on the knowledge, but on the phrasing of the "queries". Give me one example of translation software which can translate entire paragraphs well.
It makes me wonder how much "stress testing" they've done, by taking old Jeopardy questions and seeing if the output would be considered "correct" by a human arbiter.
Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The step forward will be parsing the english language.
I hope it remembers to phrase its answers in the form of a question.
Check out my sysadmin blog!
Robot: This is place where your papers are.
Subjugated Human: What is my home?
Robot: That is the incorrect question. Please follow me to a "processing station".
In what way would this be a leap forward?
Well, at least a computer program will bother to RTFA.
Being able to beat a human at Jeapordy is a fairly substantial subset of the Turing test sorted.
Natural language processing is an absolute and total bitch - take it someone who has studied it. One of my AI professors once explained it to me such; the human brain tricks you into believing the hardest tasks it accomplishes are the easiest. Stuff like language, walking, and so on take up far much more of your neural hardware than what you would consider 'thinking' - but it all happens subconsciously.
No, it isn't Artificial Intelligence per se - there is no real 'understanging' or 'intelligence' behind it -but it is a very serious technical challenge. There is a lot more to it than simply dumping Jeopardy questions into a standard search engines.
Don't take my word for it. Load up your favourite editor or IDE and start coding a simple chat bot. The difficulties that IBM must have overcome are best discovered through experience.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
That's the sort of thing that makes me believe that this team may be able to succeed.
When Deep Blue went up against Kasperov, who could it practice against? Nobody.
There are tens of thousands of Jeopardy! questions to go through before they start making up their own.
Well it did practice against other grandmasters, and it analyzed every game Kasparov had every played, where Kasparov went into the match blind.
"I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
Why employ real people when you can annoy the hell out of everyone who calls in by subjecting them to yet another tier of phone-bots.
Or reverse it:
1) Use on telemarketers that call you. ...
2) Record
3)
4) Profit
Comment removed based on user account deletion
We were just talking about this in another thread... A lot o the comments here have been that natural language software isn't that great.
This isn't at all true. Today, understanding verbal and written communication is done by state of the art computers and programs at a rate about equal to human listeners and readers. Where a computer doesn't particularly excel is in parsing that language, mostly because a computer doesn't have access to our culture in order to absorb context, but context can still be added.
Here's an example from Ray Kurzweil's book "Age of Spiritual Machines." He talks about a phrase famously given to a language parsing program that goes thus: "Times flies like an arrow." This phrase can be understood in various ways:
"* The common simile: time moves quickly just like an arrow does;
* measure the speed of flies like you would measure that of an arrow (thus interpreted as an imperative) - i.e. (You should) time flies as you would (time) an arrow;
* measure the speed of flies like an arrow would - i.e. Time flies in the same way that an arrow would (time them);
* measure the speed of flies that are like arrows - i.e. Time those flies that are like arrows;
* all of a type of flying insect, "time-flies," collectively enjoys a single arrow (compare Fruit flies like a banana);
* each of a type of flying insect, "time-flies," individually enjoys a different arrow (similar comparison applies);
* A concrete object, for example the magazine, Time, travels through the air in an arrow-like manner."
(from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_language_processing)
With a few facts it becomes obvious which is correct and which isn't. Tell the computer that there's no such thing as a 'time fly' and that flies don't time things, and that flies aren't sophisticated enough to like things in an affectionate manner, etc., and the correct interpretation soon becomes clear.
So, if you think a computer can't understand both written and verbal communication and then parse it quickly enough to answer the questions I will have to strenuously disagree. These challenges are quickly being overcome on the bleeding edge of the art. But since this perception persists that the state of the art is somehow bad, because Joe down the street messed with some free-ware language software that worked poorly -- I think a lot of people are in for a surprise, and winning Jeopardy in this manner is really the perfect way to show it off. Can't wait to see the Youtube clips.
"I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist"