Slashdot Mirror
Stanford 'Intro To AI' Course Offered Free Online
An anonymous reader writes "IEEE Spectrum reports that Stanford's CS221 course 'Introduction to Artificial Intelligence' will be offered online for free. Anyone can sign up and take the course, along with several hundred Stanford undergrads. The instructors are Sebastian Thrun, known for his self-driving cars, and Peter Norvig, director of research at Google. Online students will actually have to do all the same work as the Stanford students. There will be at least 10 hours per week of studying, along with weekly graded homework assignments and midterm and final exams. The instructors, who will be available to answer questions, will issue a certificate for those who complete the course, along with a final grade that can be compared to the grades of the Stanford students. The course, which will last 10 weeks, starts on October 2nd, and online enrollment is now open."
When asked how they would deal with ten thousand students, Professor Thrun replied:
"We will use something akin to Google Moderator to make sure Peter and I answer the most pressing questions. Our hypothesis is that even in a class of 10,000, there will only be a fixed number of really interesting questions (like 15 per week). There exist tools to find them."
Proposed:
A software program which can successfully pass this course.
Related: Turing Test
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
The actual website for the course says "The class runs from Sept 26 through Dec 16, 2011." http://www.ai-class.com/
I dont buy that. There were times in grad school when a class of 20 students generated enough questions on a topic that threw the instructors schedule out of whack. I know this is not grad school but I am assuming there are enough good students in Stanford itself and most people who will sign up voluntarily will be the ones who are interested about it. I still love the idea though. Although, it makes me wonder how the students feel about it. Stanford is pretty expensive. They have paid all that money only for coming to class now, given that the exact same class material and the instructors as well are available to anyone for free ?
about AI is a little too recursive for me...
"When asked how they would deal with ten thousand students, Professor Thrun replied, 'We'll let Skynet handle the sorting and choose the best questions'"
It doesn't look like it's a credit course for anyone who isn't a registered Stanford student. They give you a certificate of completion (Which, when combined with $1.50 will get you a cup of coffee), but not actual course credit. On the other hand, this is a course taught by two of the top researchers in the field. It's probably worth it just to learn something. I'm seriously considering this. I don't know a lot about coding AI, beyond some really high level theory; and while I'm sure that a ten week course with 10,000 of my closest friends won't make me an expert... It could be fun.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
Now I don't have to live in Massachusetts to learn me about some artificial intelligence!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm
http://www.wikipedia.org/
http://www.khanacademy.org/
http://www.ted.com/
Standford isn't first to this game, but I still applaud them.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
I don't think that e-book means what they think it does :)
If you think machine learning is a dream, you're living under a rock. Neural net models of a synapse based brain may not be as advanced as our brains, but they're certainly capable of some pretty powerful things. And that form of simulated AI is only one genre of artificial intelligence, there's still hill climbing / gradient ascent and simulated annealing which use monte carlo to initialize to random variables, slowly iterate changes, observe those changes, and then make decisions based on the results. Its a very developed field with many, many applications.
AI doesn't just mean chatbots that fail to pass a turing test. AI also applies to basic logic determination, even things like A* search are a form of artificial intelligence. Its a major domain of computer science, don't blow it off just because of the name.
GCS/MU/P d- s:- a-- C++++$ UL++ P+ L++ E+ W++ N o K- w--- O M+ V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5- X R++ tv+ b++ DI++ D++ G+ e++ h-
CS221 is the introductory course into the field of Artificial Intelligence at Stanford University. It covers basic elements of AI, such as knowledge representation, inference, machine learning, planning and game playing, information retrieval, and computer vision and robotics. CS221 is a broad course aimed to teach students the very basics of modern AI. It is prerequisite to many other, more specialized AI classes at Stanford University.
sounds like electronic human brains is the goal to me
Haven't read his AI book "Artificial Intelligence, A Modern Approach".
But about 20 years ago when I was really into Common Lisp, I read his book "Paradigms of Artificial Intelligence Programming: Case Studies in Common Lisp". It was one of the best books I had ever read. Lots of fantastic examples and code.
Makes me think I should get his "modern approach" book. Maybe think about the online course.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
It is about time the universities go the way of the book, music, news, encyclopedia and information industries in which the Internet has brought down prices significantly. There is no justification to the huge amounts of money the universities charge for the education they provide and for the learning materials. This course is a live demonstration of how it can be done for pennies. The only thing that should cost more then a few dollars is final testing of a course which can be done for about $50.00 per course. Beyond that if remote testing is used it will be very hard for any one to get a whole degree by cheating on the total amount of courses needed to graduate. A few random tests on key subjects where you have to be present physically are more then enough to put an end to any shenanigans. The only reason it has not happened yet is psychological, people (those who study and those who hire) being conservative by nature want a degree from "a well known establishment". (Yes some courses need labs and cadavers but they are a small minority)
Or don't check it out with iTunes. http://academicearth.org/
I've got to give it to Standford and MIT (and all of the other schools who have contributed to open courseware). They have done a service to everyone.
If the content of this class is exactly the same as the "real" version, and at the end you are evaluated on the grading curve right alongside "real" students... then you have to question why the cost of "really" being a Stanford student is $55,385 per year, while the cost of receiving the same product without the formal diploma is $0.
How much of the expense of modern university education today is actually tied to the core product, and how much is simple sociology? That is, only a certain percentage of society can be in the "elite" ranks by definition... and so elite institutions must price themselves accordingly to maintain the appropriate exclusion.
The field of AI is no longer focused on creating humans brains as far as I've learned from my studies. They did dream big back then when the field first came to be, but the complexity of the problem became apparent. It's simply, currently, not possible.
There is planning, search and logic AI, which finds the best possible plans for different problems, and is often used in manufacturing. Such as designing computer chips, or for instructions to robots or cranes that builds, sorts or package. AI is capable of approximating solutions to problems that cannot be done through algorithmic means; as such AI often deal with problems in NP.
Another field is game AI, which I know most about. There's a plethora of sub-fields here. The traditional game AI dealt with solving games, and has influenced many games such as chess. (AI hasn't solved chess, but found many end games that humans did not know, and found solutions to end games that humans have theorized about for over a hundred years) Modern game AI concerns itself with AI for video games. The goals are many. Fun and challenging opponents. Autonomous opponents that learn during play and gain new knowledge. Procedural content generation in respect to the player and much more. Not that much has been done in the industry, but in the field there's a lot of focus on machine learning techniques that learn the games themselves based on some criteria set by the creators.
I haven't read anything about AI that attempts to be human-like in the sense they pursued earlier lately. I've read several times however, that the Turing test is faulty and should be ignored; it serves no purpose in the field. The new purpose is to create machines that can do some task, and do it well. If its deemed intelligent by humans is of no consequence. If it does a job better than a human, then it is an advance. That it is worse than optimal is a strength, because as I said, the problems often dealt with are not solvable optimally. (At least not until quantum computing, albeit I know nothing about how that works; it seems to be another new dream, so if its like the dream of AI in the beginning, it will probably not solve all, but just make advances)
01 REDEFINE REALITY.
" Modern game AI concerns itself with AI for video games. "
No. Not AT ALL. Yes, game AI is a small part of it, but modern artificial intelligence has left game AI waaaay behind in the dust. Game AI is mostly about specialized logic to the rules of the game (pathing, observing enemy moves, etc.), maintaining a priority queue of actions, and making the right responses when the right action is chosen. Out of the 4 artificial intelligence courses I took at college, one of which was graduate-level, we spoke about video game AI for a whole... never. No, we worked on gradient ascent algorithms, simulated annealing, hidden markov models, supervised machine learning, perceptrons, neural nets, but not so much game AI. Chess AI tends to be mostly just calculate all the possible board positions resulting from a given choice, and then the results of choices from those positions, and on and on. Its mostly a brute force problem, our hardware these days can just crunch the numbers. Go is much more challenging for real AI, and thats why we stink at making computers that can play it. If you're talking about videogame AI, thats really pretty simple and isn't AI as we refer to it in computer science. They're still pretty much the same as the FPS bots from Quake 3 or the RTS bots from starcraft. Not a ton of advancement has been done.
That said, the Berkeley Overmind starcraft AI team was pretty impressive, but just to show you how seperate game AI is from real AI, the Berkley team found developing a true starcraft playing AI to be beyond infeasible. So they dedicated themselves (months of development, mind you) to just building an AI that could rush zerg to mutalisks, and then mass mutalisks. Mutalisks are better at responding to tons of microinstructions, they can fly and they have ranged attacks, so a computer can better take advantage of them than say, a melee unit. But you see, the official Berkeley AI team couldn't even begin to handle worrying about build order, different strategies, the game is already insanely complicated. They had a hard enough time just scouting for enemy expansions and so on. And yet, Blizzard included a game AI that can play all factions and uses different unit types. Is it because Blizzard has a FAR better AI development team than the Berkeley research department? No. Its because the Starcraft 2 AI isn't really AI at all, its very specialized case logic. It doesn't learn, it doesn't adapt.
Oh, and it cheats, too. When you turn up the difficulty, they couldn't actually make the AI much better, so they just make it so that insane level computers get more resources than you do. That way its artificially stronger, but not any smarter.
GCS/MU/P d- s:- a-- C++++$ UL++ P+ L++ E+ W++ N o K- w--- O M+ V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5- X R++ tv+ b++ DI++ D++ G+ e++ h-
The same brilliant AIs that will recognize the worthy questions from students.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.