Why Machine Intelligence is Very Hard - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Why Machine Intelligence is Very Hard

Description:

Some tasks that are quite easy for humans but very hard for computers. ... and include men and women of different races with different hairstyles, etc. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:58
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 48
Provided by: theopa
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Why Machine Intelligence is Very Hard


1
Why Machine Intelligence is Very Hard
  • Theo Pavlidis
  • Distinguished Professor Emeritus
  • Dept. of Computer Science
  • t.pavlidis_at_ieee.org
  • http//theopavlidis.com

2
Limitations of Computers
  • Some tasks (e.g. number factorization) are very
    hard for computers (unless it is proven that NP
    P), but they are also very hard for humans.
  • Some tasks that are quite easy for humans but
    very hard for computers.
  • Examples language translation, image analysis or
    understanding, speech recognition, game playing,
    etc. (Often grouped under Artificial Intelligence
    AI).
  • Why are they hard?

3
The State of Machine Vision
  • There have seen some successes, notably in
    industrial inspection and reading of printed text
    but a lot of problems remain open.
  • Reading distorted text (CAPTCHA) is so hard that
    it is used as a security device.
  • Content Based Image Retrieval (CBIR) is
    hopelessly behind content based text retrieval.
  • Face recognition programs are known mainly for
    their failure to perform outside the laboratory.

4
CAPTCHA
  • CompletelyAutomatedPublicTuring test to
    tellComputers andHumansApart

5
Content-based Image Retrieval(CBIR)
  • Given an image find those that are similar to it
    from a data base of images. (If the images are
    labeled, the problem is reduced to text search.)
  • Many systems have been advertised but they do
    well only on rather trivial queries.
  • This should be contrasted with the success of
    text retrieval, not only Google but earlier
    programs such as the Unix grep.

6
Example - 1
7
Example - 2
8
Reasons for the Poor Results in Machine Vision
and CBIR
  • Images are represented by statistics of pixel
    values (e.g. color histogram, texture histogram,
    etc)
  • Such statistics are unrelated to human
    perception.
  • Papers describing CBIR methods use trivial
    queries (e.g. show me all pictures with a lot of
    green).

9
Perceptual versus Computational Similarity
  • Two pictures may differ a lot in their pixel
    values but appear similar to a person. (They
    have the same meaning.)
  • Two pictures may differ in very few pixels but
    they have different meaning. (Face portraits of
    two different people in front of the same
    background.)

10
Perceptual versus Computational Similarity
Perceptually close
Pixel-wise close
11
Text versus Pictures
  • In text files each byte (or two) is a numerical
    code for a character. Therefore strings of bytes
    correspond to words that carry semantic meaning.
  • In pictures each byte (or group thereof)
    represents the color at a particular location
    (pixel). Pixels are quite far from the components
    that have a semantic meaning.

12
We do not that well in text!
  • If it is hard to search for concepts unless we
    can map concepts into words.
  • Example 1 Find all articles critical of the
    government policy in dealing with the banking
    crisis.
  • Example 2 Find all articles about a dog named
    Lucy. Amongst the Google returns was an article
    with the phrase Lucy and I spent the weekend
    alone together. We have a dog named Kyler.

13
Human Intelligence made simple
Input
Concept
Input
Output
14
The Big Difference
  • The transformation of input to concept is a
    complex process (binding), barely understood by
    neuroscientists. (In spite of claims to the
    opposite by some computer scientists.)
  • It is hard to develop algorithms for a barely
    understood process.
  • Humans can transform concepts into formal
    entities (words in a language) and then code them
    in computer readable form.
  • Computers can deal with such formal input.

15
What Neuroscientist Say
  • Perceptions emerge as a result of reverberations
    of signals between different levels of the
    sensory hierarchy, indeed across different
    senses. The author then goes on to criticize the
    view that sensory processing involves a one-way
    cascade of information (processing)
  • Source V.S. Ramachandran and S. Blakeslee
    Phantoms in the Brain, William Morrow and Company
    Inc., New York, 1998 (p. 56)

16
What Do You See?
17
Reading Demo - 1
18
Reading Demo - 1
Tentative binding on the letter shapes (bottom
up) is finalized once a word is recognized (top
down). Word shape and meaning over-ride early
cues.
19
Reading Demo -2
  • New York State lacks proper facilities for the
    mentally III.
  • The New York Jets won Superbowl III.
  • Human readers may ignore entirely the shape of
    individual letters if they can infer the meaning
    through context.

20
The Importance of Context
  • Human intelligence almost always thrives on
    context while computers work on abstract numbers
    alone. Independence from context is in fact a
    great strength of mathematics.
  • Source Arno Penzias Ideas and Information,
    Norton, 1989, p. 49.

21
The Challenges
  • We need to replicate complex transformations that
    the (human/animal) brain has evolved to do over
    millions of years.
  • We have to deal with the fact the processing is
    not unidirectional and also affected by other
    factors than the input (context). (Such factors
    cause visual illusions.)

22
A time scale
  • The human visual system has evolved from animal
    visual systems over a period of more than 100
    million years.
  • Speech is barely over 100 thousand years old.
  • Written text is no more than 10 thousand years
    old.

23
A note on brain models
  • There is a history for considering the latest
    technology to be a model of the human brain, for
    example in the 16th century irrigations networks
    were considered to be models of the brain.
  • If someone claims to have a machine modeling the
    human brain, ask how could the machine be
    modified to model the brain of a dog (since a dog
    cannot learn to write poetry, play chess, etc)?

24
A Note on Neural Nets
Is this a model of the brain?
As much as a table is a model of a dog.
25
Simplified model of a small part of the brain
26
A Dubious Approach
  • Training on large numbers of samples has been
    used as a way out of finding a way to understand
    what is going on.
  • But humans (and animals) do not need to be
    trained on large numbers of samples.
  • Rats trained to distinguish between a square and
    a rectangle perform quite well when faced with
    skinnier rectangles. They have the concept of
    rectangle!

27
Distinguish Rectangles from SquaresThe
Artificially Intelligent Approach
  • Take a hundred (or more) pictures of rectangles
    and squares, compute several statistics on each
    picture and for each picture create a feature
    vector F. Then compute a vector W so that FW
    0 for squares and FW

28
Distinguish Rectangles from SquaresThe Natural
Approach
  • Find the outline of a shape (if one exists in a
    picture) and fit a rectangle to it. Then compute
    the aspect ratio of the rectangle. If it is near
    1 (for some given tolerance), then it is called a
    square, otherwise a rectangle.
  • Criticism Method lacks generality!!!

29
No Generality in Nature
  • The animal visual systems has many special areas
    for visual tasks (about 30 in the human case).
  • We have already seen examples where high level
    (context) recognition takes quickly over the low
    level data processing.

30
Negator of Generality
31
The Learning Machine (neural net) Approach
  • It has the appeal of getting something for
    nothing, so it is kept alive.
  • We can solve a problem without really
    understanding it.
  • Give a learning machine enough samples and a
    classifier will be found!!!
  • (Forget about the rat who only needs two samples.)

32
Criteria for Choosing a Problem to Work on
  • Context should either be known or not important.
  • Processing of the input should be relatively
    simple (it should be clear what kind of
    information we need to extract).
  • For an example relying heavily on context see
    technology/BoxDimensions/overview.htm on my web
    site.
  • Comments on major areas in the next few slides.

33
Speech Recognition
  • Grammar driven models (using low level context)
    have been quite successful.
  • High level context is even better. For example,
    matching a speech fragment to a name on a list.

34
Optical Character Recognition (OCR)
  • Printed text characters have small shape
    variability and high contrast with the
    background. (CAPTCHA systems negate these
    properties)
  • Spelling checkers (or ZIP code directories in
    postal applications) introduce low level context.

35
An example of heavy use of context
  • Reading of the checks sent for payment to
    American Express.
  • Because payments are supposed to be in full and
    the amount due is known, the number written on a
    check is analyzed to confirm whether it matches
    the amount due or not.
  • (But direct payment is used more and more!)

36
An Aside Why did OCR mature when the need for
it was diminished?
  • The algorithms used in the products of the 1990s
    were known earlier but they were too complex to
    be implemented effectively with the digital
    technology of earlier times.
  • When computer hardware became cheap enough for
    good OCR, it also became cheap enough for PCs
    and the Internet.
  • Keep this in mind in your business plans!

37
Face Recognition
  • It took over forty years to built acceptable
    quality machines that recognize written symbols.
    What makes us think that we can solve the much
    more complex problem of distinguishing human
    faces?
  • Neuroscientists point out that humans have
    special neural circuitry for face recognition.

38
How these two faces differ?
39
How about these two?
40
Face Recognition and Scalability
  • The population samples in published studies are
    relatively small and include men and women of
    different races with different hairstyles, etc.
  • I have never seen a study where all the subjects
    are similar. For example, white blond men between
    the ages of 20 and 30 with long hair and beards.
  • Subjects in published studies are cooperative.

41
Face Detection
  • Before proceeding with face recognition we need
    to find the faces in a picture (face detection)
  • CMU has a web site where the public may submit
    pictures and they get back results with a green
    square overlaid on faces facing front and green
    pentagons of profiles.
  • Results are not robust.

42
Glimpses from the Face Detection Gallery - 1
43
Glimpses from the Face Detection Gallery - 3
They got the wrong person
44
Concluding Remarks
  • Before we try to built a machine to achieve a
    goal we must ask ourselves whether that goal is
    compatible with the laws of nature . (Not because
    people can do it.)
  • While such laws are clear in Physics and
    Chemistry, there are not in the field of
    Computation except in some extreme cases.

45
Human Credulity - 1
  • In spite of well understood laws of physics
    inventors persist in offering designs that
    violate them and they find takers.
  • Therefore fundamental advances in Computer
    Science are likely to reduce but not to eliminate
    preposterous claims.

46
Human Credulity - 2
  • 50 years ago Langmuir (in Pathological Science)
    debunked UFOs but also predicted that UFOs will
    be with us for a long time because it is too good
    a story for the news media to let go.
  • The view of computers as giant brains that are
    able to out-think and replace humans is about as
    valid as visits by extraterrestrials, but it
    makes too good a story for the news media to let
    go.

47
The End
  • Thats all folks
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com