February 15, 2011 by staff
Brad Rutter, First, hats off to the fight against human beings on the side of humanity in this week’s “Man vs. Machine IBM’s Jeopardy Throwdown.” Go humanity! When ATMs and toasters can come with questions to get answers on topics from pop culture better than people like you and me, who will work at Entertainment Weekly magazine in the future? PCs with icons for the heads spinning globe. Then, beings humans will be real-time “Jeopardy.” What kind of media jobs are we going? Ensure that machines are connected? Does not sound very rewarding. So are Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter to win the fking toilet fully air-conditioned or servers we will work for Hal 9000 for the rest of our lives damned. And this fking vending machine knows when you’re in 0.0009 seconds late for work.
Latest supercomputer from IBM Watson equalized with a human opponent in America quiz Jeopardy. Watson is built in the language of human understanding and using this information.
In Jeopardy candidates receive an answer, they should come with its request. Watson did in the first half of the program as he leads a $ 5000 prize was able to build.
In the second half were the questions – or “answers” – Watson was often difficult and error. This has allowed a human opponent, Jeopardy champion Brad Rutter, able to catch up. Finally, it became a link with $ 5,000 stayed on two hooks. Another opponent of the man, Ken Jennings, had to do with 2000.
Watson has won a pilot episode of the previous questionnaire. Later this week, he twice against his adversaries of men.
Man and machine have been tied after a round of Jeopardy compete opposing supercomputer IBM Watson against the former champions of popular TV game show.
Watson was tied with all-time Jeopardy champion Brad Rutter after the first round, which was released Monday. Watson and Rutter tallied two wins in 5000 and, while Ken Jennings, whose series of 74 consecutive victories is a record Jeopardy, were third with $ 2,000.
The contest is the culmination of seven years of IBM research on artificial intelligence, and to better understand the potential and limitations of the current state of the art in AI
Watson edged ahead and was at one time and 3,800 ahead of its competitors man after gale through questions such as “word of 4 letters for the editing of iron on the hoof of a horse or a box of card dealing in a casino? “Watson, in a soft voice and synthesized, correctly answered:” What is a shoe? ”
But, proving that there is no HAL (the supercomputer Almighty 2001: A Space Odyssey, whose name is composed of three letters that fall directly in front of I, B and M in the alphabet), Watson botched repeatedly, a point repeated by another competitor response that had already been ruled invalid by the legendary playmaker Alex Trebek.
Watson, named Thomas J. Watson founder of IBM, is much more than an experience of Fun Science. Much of the program is based on IBM technology that has already marketed for applications such as economic modeling, weather forecasting, prediction of disease vectors, and monitoring trends in financial markets.
“Beyond our enthusiasm for the game itself, our team is very motivated by the possibilities that the computing capacity of Watson breakthrough into the construction of a planet more intelligent and help people in their work life and personal “said David Ferrucci, who heads the team of IBM Watson.
Watson launches simultaneously natural language processing, information retrieval, knowledge representation and reasoning methods to understand the intent of questions and give what he believes is the best answer, all in a few seconds or less. The program runs on IBM Watson Power7 new massively parallel processors, which the company has deployed last year.
Watson is competing with Rutter and Jennings for a grand prize of $ 1 million. Both candidates have pledged to man give 50% of their earnings to charity if they win, while IBM will donate 100% to charity, if Watson wins.
Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.