[HN Gopher] A DARPA Perspective on Artificial Intelligence [pdf]
___________________________________________________________________
A DARPA Perspective on Artificial Intelligence [pdf]
Author : nulluint
Score : 90 points
Date : 2022-03-19 17:40 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.darpa.mil)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.darpa.mil)
| alins wrote:
| FYI the presentation is from December 2016.
| jart wrote:
| Wow I just read HDNW in a DARPA powerpoint. TSNE is nice BTW.
| gone35 wrote:
| (2016?)
|
| Also:
|
| > First wave: Handcrafted knowledge
|
| > Second wave: Statistical learning
|
| > Third wave: Contextual adaptation
|
| I understood clearly enough the first two, but the slides become
| increasingly ambiguous and fuzzy towards the end; and it seems to
| me they are mixing up a bunch of not self-evidently related
| desiderata.
|
| It is not immediate, for instance, that small "generative" models
| that are easy to interpret necessarily lead to better
| "abstraction" (whatever that means). And whatever this all has to
| do with "contextual adaptation" is to me anyone's guess.
|
| Highly alarming (but sadly, from experience, unsurprising) to see
| such fuzzy position document from such an important funding
| agency for AI.
| GWBullshit wrote:
| GWBullshit wrote:
| GWBullshit wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzC4hFK5P3g
| GWBullshit wrote:
| https://imgur.com/a/Lk6KYmw
| GWBullshit wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KO_3Qgib6RQ
|
| "When you got stuff teuxdeux"
|
| https://tenor.com/view/super-milk-chan-anime-adult-swim-
| gif-...
| itsmefaz wrote:
| Nice
| bigcat123 wrote:
| [deleted]
| Khelouiati wrote:
| 2016 ??????
| ochicial wrote:
| Here is the presentation in form of a blog post:
|
| https://machinelearning.technicacuriosa.com/2017/03/19/a-dar...
| jll29 wrote:
| It's good to see a main funding agency's perspective.
|
| As a researcher, I like their non-hype way of defining AI as
| "programmed ability", which is accurate and realistic -- also
| puts AI further apart from real intelligence, which means
| unanticipated activities.
|
| I would like to know more what they see as "abstracting", from
| their perspective.
|
| We haven't got much further in our scientific understanding of
| intelligence - if you bought a psychology text book today and ten
| years ago there wouldn't be much of a breakthrough change
| detectable in terms of modeling cognition. And as impressive as
| some computer science AI models perform certain tasks, I haven't
| been taken by surprise by them asking me a question out of the
| blue, which is one of my personal litmus tests for intelligence.
| Khelouiati wrote:
| 2016 ?????
| Animats wrote:
| "Contextual adaptation" is what they want, but that doesn't mean
| it's coming in the near future. However, this does mean that
| funding for research on it will be available.
|
| As I've said for years, the big lack in AI is in the "common
| sense" and unstructured manipulation area. Nobody can build
| something with squirrel levels of manipulation and agility, even
| in simulation. Robot manipulation in unstructured situations is
| still very poor. The people trying to simulate C. elegans at the
| neuron level can't get that to work, despite a full wiring
| diagram and years of effort.
|
| Something very low level is not understood. There's a Nobel Prize
| waiting for whomever figures that out.
| hans1729 wrote:
| > Nobody can build something with squirrel levels of
| manipulation and agility, even in simulation.
|
| Isn't that what alpha go or the StarCraft league are? Organic
| strategies in well-defined contexts (action options of the
| squirrel at Tn)? "Squirrel" is a nice reference frame.
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| Manipulation in the sense of being able to physically pick
| things up and manipulate them. Which is a difficult problem.
| StarCraft is moving a mouse pointer and clicking.
| davidmanheim wrote:
| No - those systems simulate "control" at the level of giving
| commands, not actual motor control. So practically, current
| AI can win at Go and play at superhuman levels, but still
| cannot drive a car as well as most adults.
| zardo wrote:
| You can sit down for a game of Go or StarCraft against an
| AI, and it will wipe the floor with you.
|
| But if you want it control a robot that's going to bring
| out a pot of tea while you play, you'll be wiping the
| floor.
| stuckkeys wrote:
| This made me giggle like a dumbass. Thanks. I participate
| on the SC2 AI community. It is a-lot of fun. I use Python
| and CPP for my ML. The game matches are so unpredictable
| which makes the project questionable because the AI
| indeed smashes any opponent.
| digitcatphd wrote:
| Well said
| hiddencost wrote:
| I wonder who is trying to get what funded? "Second wave" is going
| gangbusters, despite Gary Marcus' every-six-months rant; the
| review of statistical learning is reasonable given a barely
| technical audience, but the summary of "third wave" seems
| designed to extract large amounts of funding from people who
| aren't up to date on the state of the field.
| gibsonf1 wrote:
| Theranos got a great deal of funding too, and the truth about
| how none of the "Second Wave" ML self driving car technology
| comes even remotely close to safe self driving will be coming
| out probably later this year. The issue is that ML has no
| conceptual and causal understanding of anything. For
| confirmation, I've been carefully watching the countless "self
| driving" startups in San Francisco driving around, and I have
| almost never seen a driver in those cars not actively steering
| it.
| akomtu wrote:
| None of those self-driving MLs have a virtual world model in
| their "head", right? They just react to the latest video
| frame. If so, it's not even a fish level intelligence, it's
| more like a house plant.
| readhn wrote:
| cool stuff. thanks for sharing!
| MaxMoney wrote:
| Ziggy_Zaggy wrote:
| Very thought-provoking.
| mooreds wrote:
| Nice high level overview of the three waves of AI (two have
| happened, the "Contextual adaptation" wave is yet to occur).
| Includes examples and successes and failures. ("Young man holding
| a baseball bat", indeed :) ).
|
| "Systems construct contextual explanatory models for classes of
| real world phenomena" is the next goal. That is, understanding +
| being able to describe the reasoning for the understanding.
|
| No technical depth, really, but lots of words to google if you
| want to learn more.
| davidmanheim wrote:
| People may want to see the appendix to our RAND report on areas
| related to DARPA's focus, for more depth on the relevant uses
| of automation, ML, and AI
| -https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2489.html
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-03-19 23:00 UTC)