اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدThe Duality of Data and Knowledge Across the Three Waves of AI
188
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
We discuss how over the last 30 to 50 years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems that focused only on data have been handicapped, and how knowledge has been critical in developing smarter, intelligent, and more effective systems. In fact, the vast progress in AI can be viewed in terms of the three waves of AI as identified by DARPA. During the first wave, handcrafted knowledge has been at the center-piece, while during the second wave, the data-driven approaches supplanted knowledge. Now we see a strong role and resurgence of knowledge fueling major breakthroughs in the third wave of AI underpinning future intelligent systems as they attempt human-like decision making, and seek to become trusted assistants and companions for humans. We find a wider availability of knowledge created from diverse sources, using manual to automated means both by repurposing as well as by extraction. Using knowledge with statistical learning is becoming increasingly indispensable to help make AI systems more transparent and auditable. We will draw a parallel with the role of knowledge and experience in human intelligence based on cognitive science, and discuss emerging neuro-symbolic or hybrid AI systems in which knowledge is the critical enabler for combining capabilities of the data-intensive statistical AI systems with those of symbolic AI systems, resulting in more capable AI systems that support more human-like intelligence.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Knowledge graph embeddings are now a widely adopted approach to knowledge representation in which entities and relationships are embedded in vector spaces. In this chapter, we introduce the reader to the concept of knowledge graph embeddings by expla
ining what they are, how they can be generated and how they can be evaluated. We summarize the state-of-the-art in this field by describing the approaches that have been introduced to represent knowledge in the vector space. In relation to knowledge representation, we consider the problem of explainability, and discuss models and methods for explaining predictions obtained via knowledge graph embeddings.
To facilitate the widespread acceptance of AI systems guiding decision-making in real-world applications, it is key that solutions comprise trustworthy, integrated human-AI systems. Not only in safety-critical applications such as autonomous driving
or medicine, but also in dynamic open world systems in industry and government it is crucial for predictive models to be uncertainty-aware and yield trustworthy predictions. Another key requirement for deployment of AI at enterprise scale is to realize the importance of integrating human-centered design into AI systems such that humans are able to use systems effectively, understand results and output, and explain findings to oversight committees. While the focus of this symposium was on AI systems to improve data quality and technical robustness and safety, we welcomed submissions from broadly defined areas also discussing approaches addressing requirements such as explainable models, human trust and ethical aspects of AI.
AI systems have seen significant adoption in various domains. At the same time, further adoption in some domains is hindered by inability to fully trust an AI system that it will not harm a human. Besides the concerns for fairness, privacy, transpare
ncy, and explainability are key to developing trusts in AI systems. As stated in describing trustworthy AI Trust comes through understanding. How AI-led decisions are made and what determining factors were included are crucial to understand. The subarea of explaining AI systems has come to be known as XAI. Multiple aspects of an AI system can be explained; these include biases that the data might have, lack of data points in a particular region of the example space, fairness of gathering the data, feature importances, etc. However, besides these, it is critical to have human-centered explanations that are directly related to decision-making similar to how a domain expert makes decisions based on domain knowledge, that also include well-established, peer-validated explicit guidelines. To understand and validate an AI systems outcomes (such as classification, recommendations, predictions), that lead to developing trust in the AI system, it is necessary to involve explicit domain knowledge that humans understand and use.
Compiling commonsense knowledge is traditionally an AI topic approached by manual labor. Recent advances in web data processing have enabled automated approaches. In this demonstration we will showcase three systems for automated commonsense knowledg
e base construction, highlighting each time one aspect of specific interest to the data management community. (i) We use Quasimodo to illustrate knowledge extraction systems engineering, (ii) Dice to illustrate the role that schema constraints play in cleaning fuzzy commonsense knowledge, and (iii) Ascent to illustrate the relevance of conceptual modelling. The demos are available online at https://quasimodo.r2.enst.fr, https://dice.mpi-inf.mpg.de and ascent.mpi-inf.mpg.de.
AI researchers employ not only the scientific method, but also methodology from mathematics and engineering. However, the use of the scientific method - specifically hypothesis testing - in AI is typically conducted in service of engineering objectiv
es. Growing interest in topics such as fairness and algorithmic bias show that engineering-focused questions only comprise a subset of the important questions about AI systems. This results in the AI Knowledge Gap: the number of unique AI systems grows faster than the number of studies that characterize these systems behavior. To close this gap, we argue that the study of AI could benefit from the greater inclusion of researchers who are well positioned to formulate and test hypotheses about the behavior of AI systems. We examine the barriers preventing social and behavioral scientists from conducting such studies. Our diagnosis suggests that accelerating the scientific study of AI systems requires new incentives for academia and industry, mediated by new tools and institutions. To address these needs, we propose a two-sided marketplace called TuringBox. On one side, AI contributors upload existing and novel algorithms to be studied scientifically by others. On the other side, AI examiners develop and post machine intelligence tasks designed to evaluate and characterize algorithmic behavior. We discuss this markets potential to democratize the scientific study of AI behavior, and thus narrow the AI Knowledge Gap.
الأسئلة المقترحة
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
