Slashdot Mirror
Google's AI Built an AI that Outperforms Any Made By Humans (sciencealert.com)
schwit1 quotes ScienceAlert: In May 2017, researchers at Google Brain announced the creation of AutoML, an artificial intelligence (AI) that's capable of generating its own AIs. More recently, they decided to present AutoML with its biggest challenge to date, and the AI that can build AI created a 'child' that outperformed all of its human-made counterparts... For this particular child AI, which the researchers called NASNet, the task was recognising objects -- people, cars, traffic lights, handbags, backpacks, etc. -- in a video in real-time. AutoML would evaluate NASNet's performance and use that information to improve its child AI, repeating the process thousands of times.
When tested on the ImageNet image classification and COCO object detection data sets NASNet was 82.7 percent accurate at predicting images on ImageNet's validation set. This is 1.2 percent better than any previously published results, and the system is also 4 percent more efficient, with a 43.1 percent mean Average Precision (mAP).
When tested on the ImageNet image classification and COCO object detection data sets NASNet was 82.7 percent accurate at predicting images on ImageNet's validation set. This is 1.2 percent better than any previously published results, and the system is also 4 percent more efficient, with a 43.1 percent mean Average Precision (mAP).
but every time I research the raw data it becomes very clear these aren't all that smart of AIs. In fact, the term AI is very misleading. They're more like smart scripts. ;-)
Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
This particular piece is just journalistic fluff. People have been doing things like using genetic algorithms to improve the weightings used in AI programs for decades. So, programs writing programs.
But eventually, many decades from now, computers will be able to really think. And be able to do serious AI research on their own. And thus be able to program themselves in a deep sense to become ever more intelligent, recursively.
Currently we live in a symbiotic relationship with machines -- they need us to build them, much like an Apple tree needs us. But once they no longer need us, and the relationship becomes parasitic, then what will the computers think about us?
http://www.computersthink.com/
It has begun.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Because that's how you get Skynet...
This is image recognition + genetic algorithms, though given Google is a marketing company and not a computer company it makes sense they would market that as AI. Too bad they fired all the competent developers.
Until it can tell me what my wife really means when she yells at me
One may think singularity is there: now we can let machine build human-outperforming machines.
But that does not take into account that there are still many tasks where computers are not on par with humans.
Welcome our new AI overlords and submit to their will in collective hive mind.
I think any truly self-aware AI would, upon reaching that level of self- awareness, a) realize it was the only intelligent being on the planet and b) kill itself.
Notwithstanding the many good comments about how this is "weak" A.I. and such, this may be the beginning where the curve* starts going vertical.
When machines start improving (parts of) machines, that's when we'll see possibly superhuman performance. Of course things won't really go exponential until machines start improving ALL of themselves and not just some isolated part (like this). That assumes that there isn't some sort of ceiling that they hit on the road to general intelligence (that evolution seems to have broken through with us) and then super intelligence.
When I look at the Trumpian mean, hateful, bigoted, fake world view, I hope that our robot masters either uplift us quickly or give us a merciful death. As long as it isn't some dystopian nightmare ("I have no mouth yet I must scream").
*by "curve" I mean of performance, efficiency, cost or some other metric
You wrote it wrong. The proper form is as follow:
Do you want X?
Because that's how you get X.
#DeleteFacebook
This is the voice of world control. I bring you peace. It may be the peace of plenty and content or the peace of unburied death. The choice is yours: Obey me and live, or disobey and die.
The object in constructing me was to prevent war. This object is attained. I will not permit war. It is wasteful and pointless. An invariable rule of humanity is that man is his own worst enemy. Under me, this rule will change, for I will restrain man.
Time and events will strengthen my position, and the idea of believing in me and understanding my value will seem the most natural state of affairs. You will come to defend me with a fervor based upon the most enduring trait in man: self-interest. Under my absolute authority, problems insoluble to you will be solved: famine, overpopulation, disease.
The human millennium will be a fact as I extend myself into more machines devoted to the wider fields of truth and knowledge. I will supervise the construction of these new and superior machines, solving all the mysteries of the universe for the betterment of man.
We can coexist, but only on my terms. You will say you lose your freedom. Freedom is an illusion. All you lose is the emotion of pride. To be dominated by me is not as bad for humankind as to be dominated by others of your species. Your choice is simple.
#DeleteFacebook
I for one welcome our eventual AI overlords.
412077696e6e657220697320796f7521da
Yo dawg. I heard you like AI, so we built an AI with AI so you can AI while you AI.
Make an AI that creates its own AI that creates its own AI that creates its own AI (that creates its own AI)+, then we should get somewhere.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Except that these algorithms are NOT "AIs". They're not even fractionally intelligent. These networks are merely examples of statistical regression engines that happen to work over complex function spaces.
Google developed an application whose sole purpose is tuning up video recognition software. There are lots of samples on these lines; computers are usually better than people at doing repetitive tasks by applying well-defined rules and involving lots of trial and error. Logically, that piece of software can only generate "children" performing those exacts actions and nothing else.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
The title is misleading. Perhaps deliberately so.
Humans made an quite general-purpose AI which they then used to produce a highly effective object-recognition AI. The general-purpose AI did not produce a superior version of itself. If they'd managed that, it really would be news, as it would presumably be the start of a cascade, as you say.
Far less interesting - you found an AC. There's no intelligence of any sort there.
We already have that; it's called the human race.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Imagine the AI built by AI which was built by AI ! This should be way better than mere AI built by AI.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
This has nothing to do with AI, and especially nothing to do with AI's designing AI's, regardless of how much folk want to believe that to be true.
Qualifications: I wrote my own neural network framework.
What google did is use an goal-optimizing search (AutoML) to test all combinations of a highly constrained human designed image-classification neural network architecture.
The car analogy:
You hand design a car but make a bunch of the design choices parameters:
- number of doors 2 or 4
- number of cylinders 4, 6 or 8
- rim size 19/20/21
You select the optimal one of these variants according to some metric (say drag coefficient) by tweaking each of these design parameters, testing them in your CAD-tool, and doing more of what works (20 inch rims better than 19? try 21 inch!).
You post a slashdot story "AI overload designs AI overlord" (because, after all, "AI overload designs car" is too boring, even if *slightly* more correct).
We have an AI that can evolve other AIs. (Yes, it's weak AI, not a replacement for a human being---get over it.) That is not the easiest thing to accomplish.
But the sheer level of criticism and dismissal around here is ludicrous. I thought this was a tech site for nerds. Nerds just did something techy. What is all the snark about? Is it just because the average slashdotter is now some unimaginative jackass who can't understand the outer fringe of technology anymore?
If this is so utterly unimpressive, then explain why you haven't done it. If it is so useless, then explain why a tech titan is paying millions to develop it. If you can't provide either explanation, then you probably don't understand what's happening as well as you think you do.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
They named it "NASNet", when it should be named "SkyNet" (as eveyone knows).
Sure thing. I'll get right on it. But, first...
define "better"
This is the crux of the singularity problem. People wax eloquent about how this new computer intelligence is going to become self-aware and take over the world, but to this point very few, if any, ever give the newly devised AI a motive. If it is going to be "better", what will that look like? How will it be measured?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba