머신러닝(기계학습)에서

머신리즈닝(기계추론)으로 From Machine Learning to Machine Reasoning

From Machine Learning to Machine Reasoning

This post was featured in our Cognilytica Newsletter, with additional details. Didn’t get the newsletter? Sign up here

The conversation around Artificial Intelligence usually revolves around technology-focused topics: machine learning, conversational interfaces, autonomous agents, and other aspects of data science, math, and implementation. However, the history and evolution of AI is also inextricably linked with waves of innovation and research breakthroughs that run headfirst into economic and technology roadblocks. There seems to be an indelible pattern of discovery, innovation, interest, investment, cautious optimism, boundless enthusiasm, realization of limitations, technological roadblocks, withdrawal of interest, and retreat of AI research back to academic settings. These waves of advance and retreat appear to be as consistent as sea waves on the shore.

This pattern is vexing to technologists and investors because it doesn’t follow the usual technology adoption lifecycle. Popularized by Geoffrey Moore in his book “Crossing the Chasm“, technology adoption usually follows a well-defined path. Technology is developed and finds early interest by innovators and then early adopters, and if the technology can make the leap across the “chasm”, it gets adopted by the early majority market and then it’s off to the races with demand by the late majority and finally technology laggards. If it can’t cross the chasm, then it ends up in the dustbin of history. However, what makes AI distinct is that it doesn’t fit the technology adoption lifecycle pattern.

AI isn’t a discrete technology. Rather it’s a quest… a quest for the intelligent machine. This quest inspires academicians and researchers to come up with theories of how the brain and intelligence works, and their concepts of how to mimic these aspects with technology. AI is a generator of technologies, which individually go through the technology lifecycle. Investors aren’t investing in “AI”… they’re investing in the output of AI research. As researchers discover new insights that help them surmount previous challenges, or as technology infrastructure finally catches up with concepts that were previously infeasible, then new technology implementations are spawned and the cycle of investment renews.

The Need for Understanding

It’s clear that intelligence is like an onion (or a parfait) — many layers. Once we understand one layer, we find that it only explains a limited amount of what intelligence is about. We discover there’s another layer underneath, and back to our research institutions we go to figure out how it works. In our recent exploration of the intelligence of voice assistants, we’re teasing at one of those next layers: understanding. That is, knowing what something is — recognizing an image among a category of trained concepts, converting audio wave forms into words, identifying patterns among a collection of data, or even playing games at advanced levels, is different from actually understanding what those things are. This lack of understanding is why we get hilarious results in our Voice Assistant Benchmark, but also why we can’t truly get autonomous machine capabilities in a wide range of situations. Without understanding, there’s no common sense. Without common sense and understanding, machine learning is just a bunch of learned patterns that can’t adapt to the constantly evolving changes of the real world.

One of the visual concepts that we like to use in our AI & Machine Learning Project Management Training is the “DIKUW Pyramid“:

While the Wikipedia entry above conveniently skips the Understanding step in their entry, we believe that understanding is the next logical threshold of AI capability. And like all previous layers of this AI onion, tackling this layer will require new research breakthroughs, dramatic increases in compute capabilities, and volumes of data. What? Don’t we have almost limitless data and boundless computing power? Not quite. Read on.

The Quest for Common Sense: Machine Reasoning

Early in the development of artificial intelligence, researchers realized that for machines to successfully navigate the real world, they would have to gain an understanding of how the world works and how various different things are related to each other. In 1984, the world’s longest-lived AI project started. The Cyc project is focused on generating a comprehensive “ontology” and knowledge base of common sense, basic concepts and “rules of thumb” about how the world works. The Cyc ontology uses a knowledge graph to structure how different concepts are related to each other, and an inference engine that allows systems to reason about facts.

The main idea behind Cyc and other understanding-building knowledge encodings is the realization that systems can’t be truly intelligent if they don’t understand what the underlying things they are recognizing or classifying are. This means we have to dig deeper than machine learning for intelligence. We need to peel this onion one level deeper, scoop out another tasty parfait layer. We need more than machine learning — we need machine reasoning.

경축! 아무것도 안하여 에스천사게임즈가 새로운 모습으로 재오픈 하였습니다.
어린이용이며, 설치가 필요없는 브라우저 게임입니다.
https://s1004games.com

Machine reason is the concept of giving machines the power to make connections between facts, observations, and all the magical things that we can train machines to do with machine learning. Machine learning has enabled a wide range of capabilities and functionality and opened up a world of possibility that was not possible without the ability to train machines to identify and recognize patterns in data. However, this power is crippled by the fact that these systems are not really able to functionally use that information for higher ends, or apply learning from one domain to another without human involvement. Even transfer learning is limited in application.

Indeed, we’re rapidly facing the reality that we’re going to soon hit the wall on the current edge of capabilities with machine learning-focused AI. To get to that next level we need to break through this wall and shift from machine learning-centric AI to machine reasoning-centric AI. However, that’s going to require some breakthrough in research that we haven’t realized yet.

Are we Still Limited by Data and Compute Power?

The fact that the Cyc project has the distinction as being the longest-lived AI project is a bit of a back-handed compliment. The Cyc project is long lived because after all these decades the quest for common sense knowledge is proving elusive. Codifying commonsense into a machine-processable form is a tremendous challenge. Not only do you need to encode the entities themselves in a way that a machine knows what you’re talking about but also all the inter-relationships between those entities. There are millions, if not billions, of “things” that a machine needs to know. Some of these things are tangible like “rain” but others are intangible such as “thirst”. The work of encoding these relationships is being partially automated, but still requires humans to verify the accuracy of the connections… because after all, if machines could do this we would have solved the machine recognition challenge. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg problem this way. You can’t solve machine recognition without having some way to codify the relationships between information. But you can’t scalable codify all the relationships that machines would need to know without some form of automation.

Machine learning has proven to be very data-hungry and compute-intensive. Over the past decade, many iterative enhancements have lessened compute load and helped to make data use more efficient. GPUs, TPUs, and emerging FPGAs are helping to provide the raw compute horsepower needed. Yet, despite these advancements, complicated machine learning models with lots of dimensions and parameters still require intense amounts of compute and data. Machine reasoning is easily one order or more of complexity beyond machine learning. Accomplishing the task of reasoning out the complicated relationships between things and truly understanding these things might be beyond today’s compute and data resources.

[출처] https://medium.com/cognilytica/from-machine-learning-to-machine-reasoning-e19fbff154f

 

 

 

본 웹사이트는 광고를 포함하고 있습니다.
광고 클릭에서 발생하는 수익금은 모두 웹사이트 서버의 유지 및 관리, 그리고 기술 콘텐츠 향상을 위해 쓰여집니다.
번호 제목 글쓴이 날짜 조회 수
공지 오라클 기본 샘플 데이터베이스 졸리운_곰 2014.01.02 86858
공지 [SQL컨셉] 서적 "SQL컨셉"의 샘플 데이타 베이스 SAMPLE DATABASE of ORACLE 가을의 곰을... 2013.02.10 79158
공지 [G_SQL] Sample Database 가을의 곰을... 2012.05.20 95895
61 [몽고디비 mongodb] MongoDB Bulk Insert – MongoDB insertMany file 졸리운_곰 2020.10.09 772
60 [mongodb 몽고디비] How to insert multiple document into a MongoDB collection using Java? 졸리운_곰 2020.10.09 1166
59 Mongodb Bulk operation 졸리운_곰 2020.10.09 957
58 MongoDB Bulk Write(대랑 쓰기) & Retryable Write(쓰기 재시도) file 졸리운_곰 2020.10.09 1349
57 How to work with MongoDB in .NET file 졸리운_곰 2020.09.30 1380
56 MongoDB : 기본 구조 file 졸리운_곰 2020.09.30 1126
55 [mongodb] SQL to Aggregation Mapping Chart 몽고디비 SQL 쿼리 매핑 졸리운_곰 2020.09.23 1508
54 초간단 Mongo DB Quick Start Guide file 졸리운_곰 2020.09.20 920
53 MongoDB(몽고디비) 특징 정리 file 졸리운_곰 2019.12.25 1272
52 MongoDB의 한계(?) 졸리운_곰 2019.01.22 1182
51 MongoDB의 기본 CRUD 문법. 졸리운_곰 2018.12.30 1531
50 MongoDB를 쓰면서 알게 된 것들 file 졸리운_곰 2018.12.30 1593
49 [MongoDB] MongoDB의 제약사항들. (MongoDB limits thresholds) 졸리운_곰 2018.12.30 1508
48 몽고DB 컬렉션 관리 졸리운_곰 2018.12.30 1255
47 MongoDB 명령어 (database, collection, document, query, cursor, index) file 졸리운_곰 2018.12.30 1271
46 Neo4j 소개 file 졸리운_곰 2018.07.05 1331
45 [DB] neo4j를 정리하자. file 졸리운_곰 2018.07.05 1229
44 Neo4J - 그래프 데이터베이스 file 졸리운_곰 2018.07.05 1475
43 MongoDB CRUD 동작의 이해 졸리운_곰 2018.06.26 1264
42 NoSQL 데이타 모델링 #1 file 졸리운_곰 2018.04.15 1639
대표 김성준 주소 : 경기 용인 분당수지 U타워 등록번호 : 142-07-27414
통신판매업 신고 : 제2012-용인수지-0185호 출판업 신고 : 수지구청 제 123호 개인정보보호최고책임자 : 김성준 sjkim70@stechstar.com
대표전화 : 010-4589-2193 [fax] 02-6280-1294 COPYRIGHT(C) stechstar.com ALL RIGHTS RESERVED