Computer takes a stand
What happened?
At an IBM office in downtown San Francisco, a college debate champion and a loquacious IBM computer program, known as the “IBM Debater,” faced off last week in what was the first debate between a human and a machine. It demonstrated new gains in the quest for computers that can hold conversations with humans.
During the debate, Noa Ovadia, a college senior who won an Israeli championship in 2016, argued against government subsidies for space exploration. The machine argued in favor, delivering three brief speeches in a
digitally created monotone and — at least in small ways — responding to Ovadia’s human opinions.
It wasn’t exactly Lincoln v. Douglas.
In its opening statement, the machine said that subsidized space exploration “inspires our children to pursue education and careers in science and technology and mathematics ... It is more
important than good roads or improved schools or better health care.”
Noam Slonim, an IBM researcher who helped oversee the project, estimated
that the technology could have a “meaningful” debate on those 100 topics 40 per- cent of the time.
IBM chose the topic for the live debate before it began. In some cases, the machine’s lengthy speeches hinted at how it was stitching together its arguments — identifying relevant sentences and clauses and then combining them into a rea
sonably coherent, computerized thought.
Doesn’t this technology already exist?
For several years now, companies such as Google, Amazon and Apple have offered coffee table gadgets and smartphone apps that answer simple questions or perform simple tasks. (“Hey, Siri. Set my alarm for 7 a.m. tomorrow.”)
And we all remember what happened in 2011, when IBM demonstrated a system that could beat the leading players at the trivia game show “Jeopardy!” The company used this system, called Watson, as a way of promoting a wide range of products and consulting services for hos- pitals and other businesses.
But the artificial intelligence system that took part in last week’s debate show that these systems are starting to stretch beyond simple commands. It’s part of a broader effort to build tech- nology that can interact with people the way we interact with one another.
What lies ahead?
Last month, Google demonstrated a system, called Google Duplex, that can phone a restaurant and make dinner reservations. In China, you can phone Xiao- ice, a “chatbot” built by Microsoft, and spend a few minutes shooting the breeze.
The “IBM Debater” proj- ect reflects the recent accel- eration of research related to “natural language under- standing” — the effort to build machines that can under- stand the natural way we humans talk and respond in kind.
Why is it important?
As this research pro- gresses, it can provide new ways for computers to digest and process information to help us live our daily lives.
It can even lead to machines that can hold a completely convincing con- versation.
This sort of technology would have a wide range of uses. It could help businesses filter hot-button issues on social media, for instance.
More importantly, developing systems t hat can tackle language problems has broader implications: By teaching a system to do one task, it could end up helping with other tasks, too.
But don’t expect to be holding a debate with a com- puter anytime soon.
“It is now very obvious this change is happening,” said Jeremy Howard, an independent researcher working in this area.
“But these things take time.”