Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userShedding some light on Light Up with Artificial Intelligence
100
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Roberto Perera
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
The Light-Up puzzle, also known as the AKARI puzzle, has never been solved using modern artificial intelligence (AI) methods. Currently, the most widely used computational technique to autonomously develop solutions involve evolution theory algorithms. This project is an effort to apply new AI techniques for solving the Light-up puzzle faster and more computationally efficient. The algorithms explored for producing optimal solutions include hill climbing, simulated annealing, feed-forward neural network (FNN), and convolutional neural network (CNN). Two algorithms were developed for hill climbing and simulated annealing using 2 actions (add and remove light bulb) versus 3 actions(add, remove, or move light-bulb to a different cell). Both hill climbing and simulated annealing algorithms showed a higher accuracy for the case of 3 actions. The simulated annealing showed to significantly outperform hill climbing, FNN, CNN, and an evolutionary theory algorithm achieving 100% accuracy in 30 unique board configurations. Lastly, while FNN and CNN algorithms showed low accuracies, computational times were significantly faster compared to the remaining algorithms. The GitHub repository for this project can be found at https://github.com/rperera12/AKARI-LightUp-GameSolver-with-DeepNeuralNetworks-and-HillClimb-or-SimulatedAnnealing.
rate research
Read More
In the last years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has achieved a notable momentum that may deliver the best of expectations over many application sectors across the field. For this to occur, the entire community stands in front of the barrier of explainability, an inherent problem of AI techniques brought by sub-symbolism (e.g. ensembles or Deep Neural Networks) that were not present in the last hype of AI. Paradigms underlying this problem fall within the so-called eXplainable AI (XAI) field, which is acknowledged as a crucial feature for the practical deployment of AI models. This overview examines the existing literature in the field of XAI, including a prospect toward what is yet to be reached. We summarize previous efforts to define explainability in Machine Learning, establishing a novel definition that covers prior conceptual propositions with a major focus on the audience for which explainability is sought. We then propose and discuss about a taxonomy of recent contributions related to the explainability of different Machine Learning models, including those aimed at Deep Learning methods for which a second taxonomy is built. This literature analysis serves as the background for a series of challenges faced by XAI, such as the crossroads between data fusion and explainability. Our prospects lead toward the concept of Responsible Artificial Intelligence, namely, a methodology for the large-scale implementation of AI methods in real organizations with fairness, model explainability and accountability at its core. Our ultimate goal is to provide newcomers to XAI with a reference material in order to stimulate future research advances, but also to encourage experts and professionals from other disciplines to embrace the benefits of AI in their activity sectors, without any prior bias for its lack of interpretability.
Artificial intelligence has made great strides since the deep learning revolution, but AI systems still struggle to extrapolate outside of their training data and adapt to new situations. For inspiration we look to the domain of science, where scientists have been able to develop theories which show remarkable ability to extrapolate and sometimes predict the existence of phenomena which have never been observed before. According to David Deutsch, this type of extrapolation, which he calls reach, is due to scientific theories being hard to vary. In this work we investigate Deutschs hard-to-vary principle and how it relates to more formalized principles in deep learning such as the bias-variance trade-off and Occams razor. We distinguish internal variability, how much a model/theory can be varied internally while still yielding the same predictions, with external variability, which is how much a model must be varied to accurately predict new, out-of-distribution data. We discuss how to measure internal variability using the size of the Rashomon set and how to measure external variability using Kolmogorov complexity. We explore what role hard-to-vary explanations play in intelligence by looking at the human brain and distinguish two learning systems in the brain. The first system operates similar to deep learning and likely underlies most of perception and motor control while the second is a more creative system capable of generating hard-to-vary explanations of the world. We argue that figuring out how replicate this second system, which is capable of generating hard-to-vary explanations, is a key challenge which needs to be solved in order to realize artificial general intelligence. We make contact with the framework of Popperian epistemology which rejects induction and asserts that knowledge generation is an evolutionary process which proceeds through conjecture and refutation.
The ability to use symbols is the pinnacle of human intelligence, but has yet to be fully replicated in machines. Here we argue that the path towards symbolically fluent artificial intelligence (AI) begins with a reinterpretation of what symbols are, how they come to exist, and how a system behaves when it uses them. We begin by offering an interpretation of symbols as entities whose meaning is established by convention. But crucially, something is a symbol only for those who demonstrably and actively participate in this convention. We then outline how this interpretation thematically unifies the behavioural traits humans exhibit when they use symbols. This motivates our proposal that the field place a greater emphasis on symbolic behaviour rather than particular computational mechanisms inspired by more restrictive interpretations of symbols. Finally, we suggest that AI research explore social and cultural engagement as a tool to develop the cognitive machinery necessary for symbolic behaviour to emerge. This approach will allow for AI to interpret something as symbolic on its own rather than simply manipulate things that are only symbols to human onlookers, and thus will ultimately lead to AI with more human-like symbolic fluency.
In this paper we discuss how systems with Artificial Intelligence (AI) can undergo safety assessment. This is relevant, if AI is used in safety related applications. Taking a deeper look into AI models, we show, that many models of artificial intelligence, in particular machine learning, are statistical models. Safety assessment would then have t o concentrate on the model that is used in AI, besides the normal assessment procedure. Part of the budget of dangerous random failures for the relevant safety integrity level needs to be used for the probabilistic faulty behavior of the AI system. We demonstrate our thoughts with a simple example and propose a research challenge that may be decisive for the use of AI in safety related systems.
This article reviews the Once learning mechanism that was proposed 23 years ago and the subsequent successes of One-shot learning in image classification and You Only Look Once - YOLO in objective detection. Analyzing the current development of Artificial Intelligence (AI), the proposal is that AI should be clearly divided into the following categories: Artificial Human Intelligence (AHI), Artificial Machine Intelligence (AMI), and Artificial Biological Intelligence (ABI), which will also be the main directions of theory and application development for AI. As a watershed for the branches of AI, some classification standards and methods are discussed: 1) Human-oriented, machine-oriented, and biological-oriented AI R&D; 2) Information input processed by Dimensionality-up or Dimensionality-reduction; 3) The use of one/few or large samples for knowledge learning.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
