How Does Watson Know What Watson Knows?

Watson, the IBM supercomputer designed to play Jeopardy!, made his television debut yesterday, and while the game may not be over, it was a very auspicious start. Watson is currently tied with one of Jeopardy’s most successful champions, Brad Rutter, and is currently leading the most famous contestant ever, Ken Jennings.

This is pretty amazing on a lot of levels. Computers have been “smart” for a very long time (dating back to at least whenever we started teaching them chess), but Watson takes it to another level. For one, it’s worth pointing out that Watson is not connected to the Internet. In other words, Watson is storing all of the information it has for itself. More impressive, the computer can understand the intricacies of human language better than any other machine, since it has to not only generate information, but also generate the specific piece of information that the clue is looking for. Not to mention the fact that Jeopardy! clues are known for being full of wordplay and allusions that seem particularly troubling for a computer to digest.

While all this is impressive and important to the world of artificial intelligence, I’m more interested in another epistemological component of Watson’s thought process: How does Watson know what it knows?

This, after all, is far more crucial to playing Jeopardy! than it is to, say, playing chess. In chess, a player has to make a move when his turn comes up. Furthermore, a player knows all the most crucial elements of a game of chess before the game even begins (what the goal of the game is, the rules governing each piece’s movements, the relative value of each piece, etc.). With Jeopardy!, however, choosing when to answer is almost as important as choosing what to answer, and the windows for both of these decisions is about one to three seconds long.

So Watson’s ability to know stuff is less impressive than its ability to know what it knows.* Watson apparently works by using the language of the clue to generate lists of potential responses, and then running complex algorithms to select the best one,** all in a matter of seconds. As the processes are run, Watson’s “confidence” in each answer, represented by a percentage, changes until one hits the “buzz threshold,” at which point Watson rings in with that response (the buzz threshold appears to change throughout the game, presumably based on the scores and the round).

*After all, it’s hardly shocking in 2011 to see a computer that can contain massive quantities of information (particularly a computer as gigantic as Watson, which takes up an entire room and is the size of about three refrigerators).

** Of course, this is easier said than done: A clip shown of an early version of Watson showed the computer responding to a clue asking for the first nondairy creamer with “What is milk?” presumably since “nondairy” includes the word “dairy.”

It’s worth pointing out how different this is from how humans tend to think, and play Jeopardy!. Watson’s thought processes seem to operate something like guess-and-check on a massive and rapid scale. Human brains, on the other hand, simply cannot process all that information at once. Instead, human brains use clues to get closer to the correct answer, rather than evaluating a multitude of choices at once. More important with regard to Jeopardy!, Watson doesn’t play like most good contestants. Most contestants will buzz in when they have an inkling of the correct response, and finish their thought process before the time goes out. Jennings, in fact, has made an art of this—at one point last night he buzzed in and said, “Hmm, I don’t know,” before ultimately getting the correct response.

Helpfully, Jeopardy! included an answer panel at the bottom of the screen last night which helped illustrate just how different Watson’s thought processes actually are. For example, in this video of a pre-show taping, we see that one of Watson’s possible responses to “This child star got his first on-screen kiss on the set of My Girl” was “Miley Cyrus.” Of course, no human would ever guess this—even if you had no idea who was in My Girl, the male pronoun in the clue would immediately eliminate Miley Cyrus from consideration. But since the clue contained “child star” as well as “kiss” and “girl,” Watson had Cyrus as the second most-likely choice. Of course, Watson ultimately did get the right answer (Macaulay Culkin, though Jennings buzzed in first), but not in the way any human ever would have.

Of course, the fact that Watson thinks differently than Jennings or another human shouldn’t matter, since its IBM designers have addressed the two crucial epistemological concerns: Watson generally knows what is right, and it knows that what is right is right. So it seems that Watson certainly does know things, but how it knows things is totally unique. When you consider that, until very recently, humans were the only things in the world that could be said to “know” things at all, this is pretty remarkable.

Whether or not it means that our future computer overlords will be friendly (or more like this), I can’t say. But I’ll be watching tonight to find out…

Advertisements

98 responses to this post.

  1. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by singularitytrap, NPI. NPI said: How Does Watson Know What Watson Knows?: Watson, the IBM supercomputer designed to play Jeopardy!, made his tel… http://bit.ly/fHoToS […]

    Reply

  2. Interesting to see how all this plays out. I’m actually more stunned that the computer isn’t beating we humans more handily…

    Reply

  3. Interesting … thanks for sharing!

    Reply

  4. Watching Watson is fun. How do you know all about this? Watson, did you write this blog?

    Blessings,

    Ava
    xox

    Reply

  5. as kramer said, “you just totally blew my mind!”

    Reply

  6. Awesome post! This IBM upgrade to “Deep blue” will surely change the way that we look at computer “Logic”! I saw a PBS special on Watson and it’s amazing processes, and feel like i can shed some light on this situation.
    The people who created him over at IBM weren’t sure that the feat could even be done – with all the puns, and inherent language trickery involved in even first deciphering the meaning of a Jeopardy question, let alone answering it! But a few wily young upstarts within the company thought that it could be a fun (not to mention career making), enterprise so they sought after the task with fervor.
    They began with inputting – by hand, one at a time – millions of lines of logic, i.e. truth’s about language. This yielded only about a 30% accuracy with the questions.
    They then programmed Watson with all the previous Jeopardy questions, and their subsequent correct answers – this too yielded poor results.
    It took teams of people years of tweaking, and logic processing, but eventually they came up with Watson; the world’s first “Thinking” computer. And even though he doesn’t “think” per-se, he is the closest thing that we have to it in existence as of yet, and roboticists across the globe are looking to adapt (and shrink), his logic processors, and their base for thinking, to implement it’s basic platform into humanoid robots of the future!
    So cool!

    Reply

  7. i was watching some of the show while at the gym and thought that watson was pretty amazing, but the 2 humans are probably more amazing. Knowledge is power. Lets hope skynet doesnt come from IBM

    Reply

  8. Posted by humanitarikim on February 15, 2011 at 12:01 PM

    I am interested to see how this plays out, too. I expected the computer to whoop the humans’ tails, but this may not be true after all.

    Reply

  9. I’m scared! Isn’t this the basis for the Terminator robots who wipe us out in the future? *shudders*

    Reply

  10. Posted by J Roycroft on February 15, 2011 at 12:20 PM

    Remember-It was a human that built Watson, therefore human still wins. Congrats on FP

    Reply

  11. It really is fascinating, but part of me is as nervous as I am in awe. I wonder if we shouldn’t watch Stanley Kubrick’s (1968)2001: A Space Odyssey one more time, with Hal, the supercomputer? Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing and congrats on being FP’ed!

    Reply

  12. I am obviously impressed with Watson, but to be honest, the fact that Brad Rutter is tied with the computer is unbelievable. He’s like a superhuman calculator/library/encyclopedia. I think my brain needs to upgrade to the same version that he’s using…

    Reply

  13. Oh my goodness..I need to tune in tonight!! Great post!

    Reply

  14. Let me know when Watson writes its first short story…

    Reply

  15. […] here: How Does Watson Know What Watson Knows? Posted on 2011 年 02 月 15 日 by lanshang1460. This entry was posted in 未分类 and tagged […]

    Reply

  16. Posted by anonnickus on February 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM

    If Watson wins what will Watson do with the money? Why is Watson even playing in the first place? Who and what and when and where are cool. That covers 80% of the W’s. The remaining 21% raises the difficult question. The remaining W word sometimes starts with the letter H as in how do we explain that? I give this an overwhelming Spock-ian grade of F,”Fascinating”. Terrific post for raising the H word.

    Reply

    • Posted by fireandair on February 15, 2011 at 7:53 PM

      “Why is Watson even playing in the first place?”

      Because some human someplace told it to. When that human tells Watson to play some Jeopardy, and the thing replies with, “Bite me, I don’t feel like it,” I’ll know we have something novel on our hands. Until then, I shrug.

      Reply

      • I agree with you. A computer having original thought – thats something we’ve only seen in the movies. But then again, all those movies show those original thought computers overthrowing the human race. so were in a bit of a bind there :p

        Reply

  17. Posted by michael hill on February 15, 2011 at 1:30 PM

    I’ll bet Watson isn’t running Windows!

    Reply

  18. I wouldn’t say that Watson’s thought process is that much different from the way we think. We make associations based on our past knowledge and experiences. We’re not conscious of every variable as we make the association, but they all bear a weight on the final decision we come up with. If we only knew of one child star, Miley Cyrus then we might make the association that she was the child star in My Girl, but we add knowledge of her gender (question stated “his”), the fact that My Girl came out before Miley Cyris (I believe), along with other facts and observations.

    Reply

    • Posted by John S on February 15, 2011 at 5:49 PM

      “We make associations based on our past knowledge and experiences.”

      This is true, but it shows how Watson does not think like a human. After all, Watson has no “experiences” or even “past knowledge” (since I do not believe the computer can differentiate past knowledge from present knowledge). The associations it makes, instead, are based purely on linguistic connections, yielding massive amounts of associations for every question. On the other hand, a human reading that clue would make only one specific association from the phrases “My Girl” and “child star”: Macaulay Culkin.

      Reply

  19. This computer scares me.

    Reply

  20. It was hilarious when Watson answered incorrectly with the same response that Ken Jennings had previously answered incorrectly. Alex simply said, ‘No, Ken just said that, Watson.’ Best moment of the show. This is cool and all, but I watch Jeopardy for the knowledge and information so I’m slightly annoyed by this whole thing. But yeah, it’s still cool.

    Reply

    • Posted by sharon on February 15, 2011 at 8:40 PM

      Thank goodness. I’m more than slightly annoyed. Certainly a computer can buzz in faster. It looks to me like Jeopardy has become a half hour commercial for IBM. I want the regular show back.

      Reply

  21. Congrats on the FP.

    As a former Jeopardy contestant, I’d be keen to take on the computer. I’d love to play Rocky Balboa to its Ivan Drago. Interesting to watch…I’ve been fascinated for sure.

    Reply

  22. this was a great show

    Reply

  23. Posted by unclerave on February 15, 2011 at 3:38 PM

    I’m a little puzzled as to how Watson gets the questions. It doesn’t “hear”, so Alex said it gets a “text”. Just how is this text conveyed? Does it use some kind of advanced talk-to-type software? In regular Jeopardy you are not allowed to ring in until the answer has been read, out loud, in its entirety. (At least that’s what I always thought.) Unless it’s a case of editing for television, it seems that Watson frequently rings in immediately, which makes me think that it’s receiving the questions faster Dan and Brad are hearing/reading them. Advantage Watson?

    Reply

    • Posted by John S on February 15, 2011 at 5:52 PM

      They did address this last night, at least a little. The text of the question is fed to Watson at the same time that Alex reads the questions aloud, and Watson does in fact have buzz in by pressing the buzzer, so there’s no real advantage for the computer.

      Reply

      • I disagree that there is no advantage: if Watson receives the text file when Alex BEGINS reading, the computer has quite a bit of time to process the whole data package before the players do. He can buzz in as soon as the clue is completed, while the players still have to process the data.

        Reply

        • Posted by John S on February 15, 2011 at 8:14 PM

          Well, the humans can read the clue themselves as soon as Alex begins as well, so I guess it depends on whether or not you consider it “unfair” that Watson can process language faster than humans can (is it unfair if one human can read faster than another?). Also, Watson can’t buzz in until Alex finishes, which is the same constraint as the human contestants have.

          Reply

          • Posted by unclerave on February 16, 2011 at 9:11 AM

            Yeah but, if Watson doesn’t “hear” how does he know that Alex has finished? I think the whole thing is just a little sketchy. Granted, what IBM has accomplished with Watson is remarkable, almost beyond belief. But, as far as this being a “fair” competition . . . I’m not sold on it. It almost looked like Ken had given up, because he knew that he couldn’t – in most cases – buzz in faster than Watson.

          • I’ve never been on the Jeopardy set – are the clues close enough to the contestants that they can read them like the people at home can?

            I’ve always worked under the impression that the contestants relied mostly on the reading of the clue by the host.

            The relative reading differences of two humans are insignificant compared to the difference between a human’s ability to read and a computer’s ability to process a tiny text file.

  24. Posted by unclerave on February 15, 2011 at 3:39 PM

    Sorry, Ken! I meant Ken and Brad.

    Reply

  25. I watched the Matrix again last night, and then read this. Its slightly scary, not going to lie.

    Reply

  26. I friend of mine was just telling me this was going to be happening. How exciting. Go Watson Go!

    Reply

  27. I didn’t get to see the show last night. I was with my wife celebrating Valetine’s Day. Tonight will be watching and looking forward to all of the action. It should be another eventful show with Watson.

    Reply

  28. Had no idea there was a computer playing Jeopardy! I’ve got to check this out, your blog has definitely got me interested!

    Reply

  29. Hope the humans win! lol That would be really interesting to watch.

    Reply

  30. Very interesting article. I used to love programming so much that I studied a Master in Computer Science…Artificial Intelligence. Never used it after college. But it is always interesting. Love it.

    Reply

  31. I missed the show! So I’m thankful for a look into what’s been going on. Nice post.

    Reply

  32. Posted by dejavurun on February 15, 2011 at 4:58 PM

    I was pleased to see that the humans are doing as well as they are!

    Reply

  33. I am so glad a human is WINNING!I missed the show last night but will try to tune in tonight, I find this fascinating, but I have to agree with someone before me, the computer was built by a human!Good Post!

    Reply

  34. I wonder the same thing as unclerave above. One of the biggest keys to winning Jeopardy, in addition to having a lot of knowledge, is the ability to ring in quickly. Contestants are unable to ring in until after Alex finishes reading the question (answer) in its entirety. If you try to ring in early, you get locked out for a matter of seconds. If you watch the show, you’ll often see people trying to ring in and being unable to. How does Watson “ring in”? That question hasn’t been answered on the shows thus far.

    Reply

  35. Posted by Chen Mingi on February 15, 2011 at 5:51 PM

    What a hilarious spoof! You really had me going.
    Then, I called on my own “Watson” to deduce that a company like IBM wouldn’t waste a lot of money trying to make it back on a game show.
    What next? A rumor that IBM is making a supercomputer that will be working in a fast food joint flipping burgers, or as a greeter in a bigbox retailer? That would be just about as sad/funny.

    Reply

  36. There is no logical reason to fear Watson.

    Why? Because it is (theoretically and currently) impossible to create a sentient, mechanical object. No matter how much Watson “knows,” it’ll never be self-aware. Self-awareness is inherent to biological life only.

    Reply

    • Posted by John S on February 15, 2011 at 6:42 PM

      Are you confident in saying that such a thing is impossible? After all, the idea of Watson probably seemed impossible just a few years ago, and the epistemological advances this computer illustrates bring artificial intelligence one huge step closer to sentience. After all, “certainty” is a necessary, if not sufficient, component of self-awareness.

      Reply

    • All I will say is: “The dreams of one generation are the realities of another”

      Reply

  37. Posted by barbaralongley on February 15, 2011 at 6:51 PM

    I watched a great public television documentary of Watson’s development. He performs “machine” learning. Once a pattern repeats itself, Watson is able to recognize the pattern of the question and answer correctly. He did poorly at first because he couldn’t hear the questions answered by his opponents, but once they began typing the answers to the questions into his processor, he caught on. It is pretty impressive, but he still does not “think” or “feel.” We have the corner on that.

    Reply

  38. Watson kicked butt tonight.

    Reply

  39. What are the implications of this? Radio Lab out of NY aired a show titled: what does technology want? It is worth a listen. I am curious as to what your readers would suggest as the optimal relationship between humans and machines.

    Reply

  40. Posted by Se Hwan Youn on February 15, 2011 at 7:55 PM

    Interesting post! thanks for sharing! 🙂

    Reply

  41. human intelligence in jeapordy. Watson takes the other two contestants to the cleaners…

    Reply

  42. Good article. Watson is an amazing AI. I’ve watched him grow all the way from when he was concieved and answering questions at a staggerin 1 per 2 hours. The amount of work and coding that went into him and the whole design process was mind blowing. i was recently privy to a tech conferense (prior to the show) where they gave us a preveiw of his abilities with member of the audience playing him. It was just so amazing, especially as they were describing the different steps to get up to the final product.

    Reply

  43. Very interesting. I wasn’t even aware of this taking place on the show, now I will definitely make a point to check it out.

    Reply

  44. i dont get it but try make me get it

    Reply

  45. Posted by leeleegirl4 on February 15, 2011 at 9:14 PM

    I am fascinated not by how much Watson gets right, but how great his mistakes are when he is wrong. First case in point, Watson’s final Jeopardy answer tonight was Toronto when the category is U.S. cities. Clearly, this not even close. Watson, for all his technical awe, is unable to make an “educated guess” as is suggested to most students working on a multiple choice test. Also, Watson got confused yesterday on a question about the Harry Potter series. The question asked who killed Peter Pettigrew, Severus Snape, and countless others. It also gave the clue of “if only you could say his name.” Anybody or anything that does not know the murderous villain of the series is You-Know-Who aka the Dark lord aka Voldemort is not my intellectual equal.

    Reply

  46. first they make our tea then there’ll be driing our cars next the world is gone makes for a good movie oh wait wasn’t that terminator or Ai oh well makes for one hell of a show

    Reply

  47. Posted by PL Holden on February 15, 2011 at 9:42 PM

    I read a couple of replies that sound a little worried about A.I. Has anyone ever read “The Terminal Man”, by the late Michael Crichton?
    Personally I think that computers have the potential to both limit our development as thinkers as well as take it to new heights, unfortunately, just like money, the beneficiaries are probably going to be a very small percentage.

    Reply

  48. Well, ultimately Watson is a product of human invention no matter how impressive the Jeopardy playing is.

    Reply

  49. […] can read much more on this topic and the future impact of such an intelligent computer.  Here is a link to a post about Watson on the “No Pun Intended” blog.  One reader commented, “It took teams of people […]

    Reply

  50. Posted by jaswrites on February 15, 2011 at 10:43 PM

    Watson plays with math. Math gives him the advantage 🙂 Basically, you have a superconductor in Watson (or multiple superconductors) which are designed to run a series of algorithms. Now, the algorithms are complex. But as the base of them lie mathematical concepts. For example, the Markov Chain: a system which works in logical patterns in which the data set acted upon is dependent upon not the past selections/decisions but only upon the present decision. Watson knows that past selected data sets give him no advantage if he runs the algorithms for those data sets. Thus, he limtits his data set (much like mix function graphs) to only data sets which concern possible answers. Suppose you’re looking for a friends’ lost car in a large shopping mall/resturant parking lot. Your friend tells you that the car is a, let’s say, BMW or a Toyota. You immediately start looking at cars that are BMWs or Toyotas. Suppose the friend next tells you that the car is, let’s say, grey. You immediately start looking for GRAY BMWs or Toyotas. You’ve limited your data set. Similarly, Watson analyzes the words given to it and limits its data sets (with some mix equilibria dominance) to values which only concern the matter at hand.
    The computer which beat Gary Kasparov, “Deep Blue”, also ran in a similar fashion.
    Another point: Game Theory. Mathematical game theory, that is. For example, Watson can take multiple payoffs (reward of the game theory scenario) into consideration. It can run multiple game scenarios at the same time.

    Reply

  51. Well today I watched Watson play. It did pretty good 🙂

    I don’t think Skynet is close if it even happens. Humans will still be under control. But I do agree with IBM that this type of technology is needed, something that can help us gather the raw data and helps us solve some very complex problems in the world.

    Reply

  52. This is completely strange and creepy to me, but it does comfort me to know that I could have answered the “My Girl” question correctly over a computer. My useless movie trivia comes out above science and technology! Woo!

    Reply

  53. Ok… I have a good question.

    If Watson can process 80 trillion calculations a second… What does that translate in mph. and how does it compare to the speed of light. Faster? Slower? Can something process that fast or faster? and if so… would processing units find themselves in a different state of time? holy crap… and if so, could the observe and log what is happening in the future before we can?

    Im freaking my self out. Done!

    Reply

    • Posted by jaswrites on February 16, 2011 at 3:45 AM

      In an hour, Watson would be able to process 28800000000000000 calculations (288 hundred trillion) per hour. Technically, you wouldn’t be able to convert the amount of calculations into a distance, unless you mapped it out on a Cartesian plane. But, if you converted the speed of light into photons, technically, yes. Watson is CALCULATING faster than the speed of light. Yet, the important fact: Watson needs photons to run (electrons, for that matter). Theoretically, even if it was able to calculate faster than the speed of light, we wouldn’t see the algorithms running properly because the speed of light would be less and thus the display panel would just be a blur. In fact, at that rate, it would be a huge blur of whizzing numbers and variables.

      Reply

  54. Ultimately, it’s 2011 remake of Tracy & Hepburn’s Desk Set. The computer is only as “good” as its programming… I mean, somebody, somewhere, had to give it or grant access to the information, right? So it can recall information it has stored, based on multiple choices, and use math formulas to calculate the “best guess” – don’t we call that a high school test-taking strategy?

    Reply

    • Posted by jaswrites on February 16, 2011 at 10:48 PM

      Technically, yes. The difference: Watson is able to run thousands (or millions) of those formulas simeultaneously without tiring.

      To give Watson so much information, I’m guessing expansive data sets: dictionaries, search engines, encyclopedias, everything. Basically, instead of Watson being connected to a book or the internet, Watson has the data fed inside it.

      Reply

  55. Today Watson wins at Jeopardy and tomorrow it dethrones Google. Yeah!

    Reply

  56. I’ve seen this on the news here in the UK last night. However, they did not explain how Watson ‘thinks’ and how he decides when to buzz, so thank you for the explanation. I find it fascinating, I’ll be very interested to know how the game ends.

    Reply

  57. Judgment Day, the beginning of the war between man and machines. Be scare.

    Reply

  58. the best person… .-”
    the good person… perfect.. 😀

    Reply

  59. I thought it was annoying because of course he is going to buzz in before the other players. One of the keys to Jeopardy is buzzing in first. I just got bored with it after it basically kept buzzing in first.

    Reply

  60. Why did Watson answer “Toronto” last night? That didn’t seem to make any sense. Also, how does Watson get recent pop culture answers? Is Watson connected to the web? Does the web search that fast?

    Reply

  61. The whole thing is fascinating really. Here I thought I was at least somewhat intelligent and then I realized that I may need the work of the IBM personnel to get through graduate school. Lol. Amazing…

    Reply

  62. Posted by Quidmont on February 16, 2011 at 11:53 AM

    Great post. Thanks!

    I found your post here, not surprisingly, from your recent publicity on the WP pages. But I don’t normally check out random blogs too much.

    This week, however, being “Random Acts of Kindness” a blogging buddy suggested we also make it Random Blog Week! You can read more if you like at http://whatsbuggingmetoday.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/or-not-randomblog2011-challenge/

    Thanks for a great post and interesting blog!

    – Bob (Quidmont) Johnston

    Reply

  63. Posted by literaryescape on February 16, 2011 at 1:10 PM

    This is really interesting. My dad works for IBM and was telling me about this. Thanks for a great post!

    – Michelle

    Reply

  64. Posted by zuleikalim on February 16, 2011 at 2:22 PM

    I was watching it last night and I can’t believe Watson. I had to stop watching it show because it was freaking me out.

    Reply

  65. Wow wow and wow again, this is great to the world of artificial intelligence indeed. Nice

    Reply

  66. […] Watson, the IBM supercomputer designed to play Jeopardy!, made his television debut yesterday, and while the game may not be over, it was a very auspicious start. Watson is currently tied with one of Jeopardy’s most successful champions, Brad Rutter, and is currently leading the most famous contestant ever, Ken Jennings. This is pretty amazing on a lot of levels. Computers have been “smart” for a very long time (dating back to at least whenever w … Read More […]

    Reply

  67. Posted by unclerave on February 17, 2011 at 12:04 PM

    It looks like someone doesn’t like the questions/comments of nick gill and unclerave. Hmmm! I wonder if John S. either works for IBM, or is a major shareholder???

    Reply

    • Posted by John S on February 17, 2011 at 7:06 PM

      Heh, I wish. As for your and Nick’s questions, I think it comes down to what you consider an “unfair” advantage and what you consider just an advantage. The questions were revealed to both the human contestants and to Watson at the same time, and neither could buzz in until Trebek finished reading the question (how Watson knew when Trebek was finished I truthfully don’t know, but I assume that there are various ways of solving this problem. They were pretty clear that Watson was playing by the same buzzing rules as the contestants.). If Watson can process the questions faster and buzz in faster than a human can, then that only makes it a superior player. I wouldn’t call that advantage “unfair” anymore than a human who can read or think faster has an “unfair” advantage over the competition.

      Reply

  68. Posted by Janus S. Suarez on February 17, 2011 at 9:44 PM

    When robots are smarter than humans. . .it’s scary and creepy. . .but, congratulations to IBM for such fine piece of work. . .nice post by the way.

    When Robots think like Humans

    Life is a bit of information

    Reply

  69. […] How does Watson know what Watson knows? […]

    Reply

  70. […] Asa ca cei care doresc sa le apara avatarul celorlati din lista, sunt nevoiti cel putin momentan, pana se va gasi o alta solutie, sa instaleze versiunea 11 beta de yahoo […]

    Reply

  71. […] S offered his thought on the appearance of IBM’s Watson on Jeopardy! but that was before the computer built its insurmountable lead over the petty humans. Ken […]

    Reply

  72. […] few weeks ago, John S described how impressed he was by IBM’s Watson, so you can imagine his surprise when the supercomputer lost to someone from New Jersey (Hint: It […]

    Reply

  73. […] can read much more on this topic and the future impact of such an intelligent computer.  Here is a link to a post about Watson on the “No Pun Intended” blog.  One reader commented, “It took teams of people […]

    Reply

  74. i was watching some of the show while at the gym and thought that watson was pretty amazing, but the 2 humans are probably more amazing. Knowledge is power. Lets hope skynet doesnt come from IBM

    Reply

  75. Yes interesting indeed! I think the humans lost this one. No real surprise there. 🙂

    Reply

  76. I am sure it does ! already…

    Reply

  77. […] Watson, the computer that dominated Jeopardy a couple years ago? Well, apparently he still does not get […]

    Reply

  78. Remarkable issues here. I am very satisfied to peer your post.
    Thank you a lot and I’m taking a look forward to contact you.
    Will you please drop me a mail?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: