DISCOVER Magazine. Science, Technology and The Future
Current Issue
Subscribe Today »
  • Renew
  • Give a Gift
  • Archives
  • Customer Service
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Newsletter
  • Health & Medicine
  • Mind & Brain
  • Technology
  • Space
  • Human Origins
  • Living World
  • Environment
  • Physics & Math
  • Video
  • Photos
  • Podcast
  • RSS
Science Not Fiction
« A Microwave Beam to Keep the Frost Away
Edison Would Have Been Proud of Today's Young Data-Crawlers »

IBM Computer Fails the Turing Test But Just Might Pass the Jeopardy Test

In his 1950 paper “Computing Machinery and Intelligence,” Alan Turing proposed what is now known as the Turing test in artificial intelligence. The idea is that if you are unable to discriminate between a computer and a human who is answering your questions via a keyboard and screen, then the computer is intelligent.

Single_Jeopardy!_Game_BoardThere are many problems with this idea, but despite these problems, it still remains a compelling benchmark, and one that has yet to be reached. But think of the following variation: rather than have your computer and human team answer any old question, the questions have to be similar to what you would expect on the quiz TV show Jeopardy! – clues about trivia in the form of answers to a question that you must come up with.

Even this greatly restricted version of the Turing test is very challenging, but I.B.M.’s machine called “Watson” has recently made intriguing steps toward passing it. Watson takes any Jeopardy-type question and gives a response. It was not developed as a new type of intelligence test, but instead as a grand challenge to beat a human at a language-based task, like a Deep Blue of language (IBM’s Deep Blue chess playing computer beat the world chess champion in 1997). You can challenge it yourself here. It currently uses a fixed set of a large number (in the millions) of documents and a sophisticated parallelized statistical algorithm running on a supercomputer. By being parallelized, the algorithm can try a large number of possible interpretations of the question out at once, and pick the most likely interpretation.

One of the problems with the original Turing test, which the Jeopardy test also suffers from, is that only forms of intelligence expressible through language are eligible for testing. It’s perfectly consistent, for example, for a robot to pass the Turing test, but then fall over when it tries to take its first step. Walking is a skill. It’s learned by a different part of the brain than are facts like what a neti pot is. Memory for these skills is called “procedural memory,” while “declarative memory” is the kind of memory for facts – and many studies within neuroscience have shown that these two forms of memory live in different places in the brain.

But just as we can identify what sorts of intelligence would fall through the cracks of the Turing test, it’s also interesting to think about the kinds of intelligence a Jeopardy test could test for, and where it might fail relative to the Turing test.

For instance, while a machine that passes the Turing test should convincingly answer questions about its first kiss, Watson would be pretty stumped on that one. Presumably, a machine that convincingly describes what their first kiss was like is being masterfully deceptive (at least for the first few models!) – but nonetheless, describing “first-person” states like the emotions that went with your first kiss is quite complex, and faking this convincingly is hard. In this way, we can see the Jeopardy test is a less demanding test than the Turing test. But that’s good – the Jeopardy test is a big challenge as it stands and it will be a remarkable breakthrough if Watson ultimately succeeds when it goes head to head against a human, as it is expected to sometime this fall. Having more attainable tests leading up to the Turing test is very helpful to researchers in artificial intelligence.

While we know not to expect Watson to get the answers to questions regarding feelings right, there are also some simple facts we can’t expect it to know. For instance, a computer that passes the Turing test must be able to give convincing answers to random biographical questions like “where did you get your first report card?”, but giving Watson the Jeopardy form of this question — “where I got my first report card” — should stop him in his tracks.

Can you think of other examples of things that would pass the Turing test but leave Watson with smoke coming out of its ears? Leave your thoughts in the comments.

Share

June 28th, 2010 Tags: Artificial Intelligence, IBM, Watson
by Malcolm MacIver in Artificial Intelligence | 1 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

One Response to “IBM Computer Fails the Turing Test But Just Might Pass the Jeopardy Test”

  1. 1.   IBM Computer Fails the Turing Test But Just Might Pass the … | Just Useful for you Says:
    July 6th, 2010 at 3:37 pm

    [...] Visit link: IBM Computer Fails the Turing Test But Just Might Pass the … [...]

Leave a Reply





    • About Science Not Fiction

      Sometime in the future, a group of renegade scientists and technologists will take a time machine to now. They're spilling the secrets of tomorrow here at Discover's Science Not Fiction blog.

      ▪ Malcolm MacIver is a bioengineer at Northwestern University who studies the neural and biomechanical basis of animal intelligence. He consults for sci-fi films (Tron Legacy, Joss Whedon's The Avengers), and was the science advisor for Caprica. He covers AI and robotics for Science Not Fiction.

      ▪ Kyle Munkittrick (Web, Twitter) is program director at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies. He covers transhumanism.

    • Subscribe

      The RSS feed for Science Not Fiction is here RSS.

    • 80beats

      Categories

      Categories

      • Aging (or Not)
      • Aliens
      • Animation
      • Apocalypse
      • Artificial Intelligence
      • Astronomy
      • Biology
      • Biotech
      • Biowarfare
      • Books
      • Cars
      • Chemistry
      • Codex Futurius
      • Comics
      • Computers
      • Conferences
      • Cyborgs
      • Electronics
      • Energy
      • Engineering
      • Genetics
      • Geology
      • Materials
      • Mathematics
      • Media
      • Medicine
      • Meta
      • Mind & Brain
      • Movies
      • Nanotech
      • Neuroscience
      • Philosophy
      • Physics
      • Politics
      • Psychology
      • Robots
      • Security
      • Space
      • Space Flight
      • The Singularity
      • Theatre
      • Time Travel
      • Top Posts
      • Transhumanism
      • Transportation
      • TV
      • Uncategorized
      • Utter Nerd
      • Video Games
      • Weapons
      Archives

      Archives

      • October 2011
      • September 2011
      • August 2011
      • July 2011
      • June 2011
      • May 2011
      • April 2011
      • March 2011
      • February 2011
      • January 2011
      • December 2010
      • November 2010
      • October 2010
      • September 2010
      • August 2010
      • July 2010
      • June 2010
      • October 2009
      • September 2009
      • August 2009
      • July 2009
      • June 2009
      • May 2009
      • April 2009
      • March 2009
      • February 2009
      • January 2009
      • December 2008
      • November 2008
      • October 2008
      • September 2008
      • August 2008
      • July 2008
      • June 2008
      • May 2008


  • Kalmbach Publishing Co.

    Copyright © 2012, Kalmbach Publishing Co.

    Privacy - Terms - Reader Services - Subscribe Today - Advertise - About Us