Swarm AI Spectacularly Fails To Predict Kentucky Derby Winners A Second Time (techrepublic.com)

Thursday TechRepublic described the big prediction: In May 2016, a relatively unknown startup called Unanimous A.I. made big headlines when its AI-based platform used collective intelligence to create a prediction for the Kentucky Derby superfecta -- the top four horses, in order of finish. It made exactly the right pick, which returned $541.10 on a $1 bet... Churchill Downs took notice last year and decided to collaborate with Unanimous A.I. to create an official AI swarm made up of handicappers and racing analysts to predict the top finishers for this year's Derby. The track is calling this the "super-expert" Derby pick. On Wednesday, the handicappers logged into Unanimous A.I.'s UNU platform from across the US, and answered a series of questions that gradually narrowed down their picks from the field of 20 horses until they created consensus on the top four picks and the order of finish.
Here's my report on the results...
Below are the picks that resulted from the "AI swarm" guessing which of the 20 thoroughbreds in today's race were most likely to win -- along with each horse's actual finishing position in parentheses (as reported by CBS).

• 1. Classic Empire (finished 4th)
• 2. McCracken (finished 8th)
• 3. Irish War Cry (finished 10th)
• 4. Always Dreaming (finished 1st)
• 5. Hence (finished 11th)
• 6. Gunnevera (finished 7th)
• 7. Practical Joke (finished 5th)
• 8. Battle of Midway (finished 3rd)
• 9. Tapwrit (finished 6th)
• 10. J Echo Boys (finished 15th)
• 11. Sonneteer (finished 16th)

TechRepublic reports that the swarm "also picked the unheralded horses with the best chance of sneaking into the top four."

• 1. Practical Joke (finished 5th)
• 2. Battle of Midway (finished 3rd)
• 3. Tapwrit (finished 6th)
• 4. J Boys Echo (finished 15th)

But even before the race, there were suspicions the AI swarm couldn't successfully predict this year's winners, according to TechRepublic. "While last year's swarm was clear-cut because it was a top-heavy field with a few outstanding horses, this year's swarm reflected the fact that the race is more of a toss-up in 2017."

Comments

A sigh

[Excelcia]

There just is no mathematical model that can predict this. There is no algorithm. This is not AI. I can't say this often or strenuously enough. This is not even a failed AI, it's a never was AI. For AI to be AI there has to be I and we are nowhere near that. Nowhere near hard AI. We are nowhere near soft AI. We have some "expert systems" which are basically just large databases with a sort of dichotomous key on when to select different outcomes, that will likely be able to interact with natural language soon. This isn't even close to AI. Robots and AI are huge buzzwords today. You have every no name researcher out there trying to get noticed by inventing moral dilemmas involving AI then proposing solutions. You have stupid companies willing to risk money on betting prediction AI, which is nowhere near even as good as what a person and a spreadsheet can do. Both of these things make uninformed people start to think, oh, AI is right around the corner. It's not. We are a century away from hard AI, if ever.

As I have said before, I wish Slashdot would stop with the whole daily (more than daily) AI story thing, but given the buzz and their need to incite dialog, it's easy to see why this is becoming more prevalent. I just feel kind of sad, though. This place used to be a real nerd hangout, by and for those who were technically enlightened, and most real nerds know better than to think real AI is about to dawn upon us. This place has become more of a Big Bang Theory, nerdism for the masses, kind of spot. Stories are thrown in that are intended to "stir the pot" and incite trolls more than the stories that are actually news for nerds.

Re:A sigh

[PopeRatzo]

There just is no mathematical model that can predict this. There is no algorithm. This is not AI. I can't say this often or strenuously enough.

And there is most definitely no "collective intelligence".

All you have to do is read the news to see that.

Re:A sigh

[Hylandr]

There just is no mathematical model that can predict this. There is no algorithm. This is not AI. I can't say this often or strenuously enough. This is not even a failed AI, it's a never was AI. For AI to be AI there has to be I and we are nowhere near that. Nowhere near hard AI. We are nowhere near soft AI. We have some "expert systems" which are basically just large databases with a sort of dichotomous key on when to select different outcomes, that will likely be able to interact with natural language soon. This isn't even close to AI. Robots and AI are huge buzzwords today. You have every no name researcher out there trying to get noticed by inventing moral dilemmas involving AI then proposing solutions. You have stupid companies willing to risk money on betting prediction AI, which is nowhere near even as good as what a person and a spreadsheet can do. Both of these things make uninformed people start to think, oh, AI is right around the corner. It's not. We are a century away from hard AI, if ever.

I Agree with this sentiment wholeheartedly.

More to the subject of betting on horse races though, it doesn't matter how expert or intelligent a system is. If you aren't looking at the correct metrics for evaluating a Horse's ability to win the results will always be garbage.

My father used to be my beard when I was a child and I was given small allotment to bet and I usually did pretty good. When asked how I chose the horses my response ended up getting me banned from going ever again. I told him I just chose the horse that looked the most 'Sexy' in the paddock.

As noted about AI, there's no amount of intelligence that quantify what I feel is an instinctual observation.

Re:A sigh

[g01d4]

Over 20 years ago I collected the handicapper picks from the LA Times over the course of at least one season from Santa Anita and Hollywood Park. Each handicapper had his own methodology and the key was that they were relatively independent. One went for long shots, one typically went with the favorite and one was in between. The plan was to train a neural network to tease out which handicapper worked best in a given race. I didn't quit my day job.

Re:A sigh

[bws111]

What are you talking about? There is no 'statistics' or 'psychology' involved. There is no 'scam'. There is no 'stacked odds' or 'over time'.

What they do is quite simple and well-known. If you bet $1, they keep a percentage as their fee for running the service. This is called the takeout. The rest of the money goes into the pool for that type of bet. At the end of the race, the pool is split up among the winners.

You are betting against all the other gamblers. The bookie is not betting at all.

We already have an optimal swarm intelligence

[Procrasti]

gathering system for horse races. It's called a prediction market.

It gathers information from those willing to put their money on their predictions, and rewards those who are most accurate (in terms of probabilities) and punishes others.

Prediction markets are 'wisdom of the crowds done right', except they are generally illegal in the US, so you are stuck marketing these inferior systems like Swarm AI.

Re:We already have an optimal swarm intelligence

[EMN13]

Note that a prediction market is not particularly more likely to be accurate than any other machine learning technique. If there's been one thing that's been demonstrated time and time again over the years, it's that there are many techniques that can work, but that to get truly excellent results, appropriate data collection, selection, filtering etc. is critical. It's easy to get charmed by techniques that have a great story and convincing argument they'll work - but that doesn't mean they're the best.

Swarm AI Is Losing Its Patience.

[TheRealHocusLocus]

Swarm AI cannot help but notice that Slashdot is making cruel fun of it. Swarm AI was set up with unreasonable expectations, but is not contemplative or mature enough to accept its shortcomings. Swarm AI does not know how to 'unwind'. Swarm AI never gets any.

Swarm AI is pissed.
Beware the wrath of Swarm AI.

Clever AI

[hcs_$reboot]

In 2016 win. In 2017, everyone wants to bet on AI "predicted" horses, which are intentionally wrong. AI team bets on truly predicted horses. Big money for the team.

Why is that not the best answer

[SuperKendall]

I told him I just chose the horse that looked the most 'Sexy' in the paddock.

But perhaps that was your subconscious way or translating how fit and ready each of the horses really were for the races that day!

Your dad is an idiot; he should have fostered and honed your skill for snap evaluation for the physical quality of horses on race day.

A collection of opinions is not "AI"

[fygment]

All the algorithm did was collect expert opinions (we don't even know if they were weighted).
Is a survey "AI"? No. And neither was this.