taai 2016 keynote talk: contention and disruption

Discover the world at Leiden University

The 2016 Conference on Hsinchu, Taiwan, Keynote speech TAAI 2016Technologies and Applications of Artificial Intelligence 27 November 2016(TAAI 2016)

Contention and Disruption

H. Jaap van den Herik

Leiden Centre of Data Science Digital Technology for Law and Society (LCDS) (elaw)

Leiden University Leiden University

TAAI 2016: National Tsing Hua University


AcknowledgementsWith much pleasure I would like to thank I-Chen Wu and the

Taiwanese Association for Artificial Intelligence for the invitation and Cindy Ko for the organisation of many details.

Research is team work over a long period of time. Therefore any list of collaborators is large. Below I provide a selection. For

their contributions and inspiration, I would like to thank:

I-Chen Wu, Aja Huang, S.C. Hsu, Tsan-sjeng Hsu, Hiroyuki Iida, Erik van der Werf, Victor Allis, Mark Winands, Jeroen Donkers,

Levente Kocsis, Dennis Breuker, Jahn Saito, Guillaume Chaslot, Jos Uiterwijk, Daniel Dennett, Adriaan de Groot, Joost Kok, Jacqueline Meulman, Aske Plaat, Michel Rademaker, Bart

Custers, Cor Veenman, Cees de Laat, members of the research school SIKS, members of LCDS, Joke Hellemons, Eric Postma.


Contents1. Contention (1950-1990)2. Notions and Developments3. Four Methodological Leaders4. A Paradigm Shift5. Provisional Conclusions6. Disruption (1990-2030)7. Innovation and Nearby Innovations8. Four Conceptual Leaders9. Go for Go for TAAI10.Conclusions


Contention (1950-1990-2010)

In the academic world:

Contention means: (a) rivalry or competition

(b) a point contended for

in a scientific debate

We consider both meanings


Other Notions- Scientific Findings

Discoveries Revolutions

- A Paradigm Shift

- Intuitions


Intuitions1. New Developments:

(a) Clouds(b) Crowds: - Crowdsourcing

- The Wisdom of the Crowd

2. Refinements:(c) WATSON

3. Opponents:(d) Games


Prevailing Question on Contention

Will Contention between Paradigms lead to

a Paradigm Shift?

- A refinement of definitions is necessary.

What is - contention- a paradigm- a paradigm shift ?

7


Two Well-known Paradigm Shifts

(1)From Ptolemaic Cosmology to Copernican

Cosmology

(2) From Newton’s physics to Einstein’s relativistic

theory

And maybe:(3) Erik Verlinde (2016)Emergent Gravity and the Dark

Universe


Scientific Discoveries Karl Popper (1902 - 1994): The Logic of Scientific Discovery

Thomas Kuhn (1929 – 1996): The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

Imre Lakatos (1922 – 1974): The Methodology of Scientific Research

Programmes

Paul Feyerabend (1924 - 1994):Against Methods


Four Methodological Leaders

Karl Popper

Thomas Kuhn

Imre Lakatos

Paul Feyeraben

d


Due Credit to the Great MenKarl Popper (1934). Logik der Forschung. English

translation (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Basic Books, New York, N.Y.

Thomas Kuhn (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press. Chicago, IL.

Imre Lakatos, John Worall, and Gregory Currie (1980). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge University Press, USA.

Imre Lakatos (1976) Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery. Cambridge University Press, USA.

Paul Feyerabend (1975). Against Method. New Left Books, London, UK.

Imre Lakatos, Paul Feyerabend, and Matteo Matterlini (1999). For and Against Methods. University of Chicago Press, USA.


Four Scientific Domains1. Games

Rivals: Minimax and Monte Carlo Tree Search

2. (Super)computersRivals: Personal computing and Cloud Computing

(workstations inclusive)

3. WATSONRivals: Human Intellect and WATSON

4. eBayRivals (three): (a) Human Decision

(b) Computer Decision(c) Crowdsourced Online Dispute

Resolution


The World of Games

From Chess to Go

From Minimax to MCTS

Is this a Paradigm Shift ?


Scientific Breakthroughs on Computers and Games

John von Neumann (1903-1957):Theory of Games and Economic Behavior

Claude Shannon (1916-2001):Chess Programming / Information Theory

Alan Turing (1912-1954):Turing Machine


Three Leaders in Computer Science

John von Neumann

Claude Shannon

Alan Turing


Five Challenging Questions1. Can a computer play Chess and

Go?2. Can a computer play at

grandmaster level?3. Can a computer defeat the human

world champion?4. Can a computer solve the game?5. Are some generic ideas applicable

elsewhere?

Discover the world at Leiden University17

Minimax

3 4 2 7

3 2

[3]


α-β Algorithm

3 4 2 7

3

3

2β-pruning


The Strength of α-β

3 4 2More than thousand prunings


The Importance of α-β Algorithm

3 4 2

β-pruning

3

3

Discover the world at Leiden University21

THE NUMBER OF DIFFERENT,

REACHABLE

POSITIONS IN CHESS IS

(CHINCHALKAR): 1046

Tromp (2016): for Go it is 10172

The Possibilities of Chess


A Calculation (around 2000)

NUMBER OF POSSIBILITIES: 1046

SAVINGS BY α-Β ALGORITHM: 1023

1000 PARALLEL PROCESSORS: 103

POSITIONS PER SECOND: 109

LEADS TO: 1023-12 = 1011 SECONDSA CENTURY IS 109 SECONDSSOLVING CHESS: 102 CENTURIES

SO 100 CENTURIES OR 10,000 YEARSWE RETURN TO THIS NUMBER.


Improvements on the Estimate• MATJAŽ GAMS (30 August 2005)

In 2035 a machine takes 4 months to solve chess.

• VINCENT DIEPEVEEN (27 October 2005)In 2066 the game of chess is solved.


The Impact of Moore’s LawGAMS AND DIEPEVEEN RELY ON

MOORE’S LAW

Every 18 months the computer capacity is doubled.

Therefore in 30 years (30 = 20 x 1.5)

the law gives a speed up of 220 = 106


A New Calculation (2010)

NUMBER OF POSSIBILITIES: 1046

SAVINGS BY α-Β ALGORITHM: 1023

1000 PARALLEL PROCESSORS: 103

POSITIONS PER SECOND: 1014 (9+6=15; 15-1=14)LEADS TO: 1023-17 = 106 SECONDSA CENTURY IS 109 SECONDSSOLVING CHESS: 10-3 CENTURIES

So roughly 37 days in 2035. This is for Chess.


When will Go be solved?

Open Question

After 2050, if it may happen at all.

This opinion is supported by an old sheet from 2011.


OLD SHEET (2011) FUTURE EXPECTATIONS• MoGo-Titan defeats a top Go player in• 2008 9 – stones handicap• 2009 - 8 – stones handicap• 2010 - 7 – stones handicap• 2011 - 6 – stones handicap so far OK• 2012 - 5 – stones handicap• 2014 - 4 – stones handicap• 2016 - 3 – stones handicap• 2018 - 2 – stones handicap• 2019 - 1 – stones handicap• 2020 - ERICA defeats the human Go World

ChampionThe singularity point in Go is reached


Two Related Questions

(1)Is MCTS reflective of Kuhn’s viewpoint?

(2)Is MCTS a result of Feyerabend’s view?


Provisional Conclusions on a Paradigm Shift for

Games(1)From Chess to Go is a shift of focus

(not a paradigm shift)

(2) From Minimax to MCTS is/comes closer to a paradigm shift

It weakly fulfils the conditions of a paradigm shift(using a new framework, using a new technology).

[ see Newton – Einstein – Verlinde]


Disruption (1990-2016-2030)Disruption is the successor of

Contention.Disruption means (a) the change that occurs when new digital technologies and business models affect the value propositions of existing goods and services

(b) the displacement of an existing technology (market or industry) by something completely new and more efficient and more worth while.We consider both meanings.


Prevailing Question on Disruption

Will Disruption lead to the emergence of a New Paradigm?

- A refinement of definitions is necessary, e.g.,

Innovation vs. Disruption- What is the difference between

- (a) a paradigm shift, and- (b) a new paradigm?


Announcements of Disruptive Thoughts

Daniël Dennett (1990):Consciousness ExplainedRichard Susskind (1998):Robot Doctors and Robot LawyersNick Bostrom (2014):SuperintelligenceJaap van den Herik (2016): Intuition is Programmable


Four Announcers of Disruptive Thoughts

Daniel Dennett

Richard Susskind

Nick Bostrom

Jaap van den

Herik


Nine (Nearby) Innovations• Elon Musk: autonomous cars• Richard Susskind: robot doctors and

lawyers • Nikolaos Aletras et al.: AI Judge• Block Chain: bitcoins• Internet of Things• Drones• Crowdsourced Online Dispute Resolution• Uber Taxi• AirBnb

• What is a disruptive innovation?


Ethical Decisions by Intelligent Programs

- Autonomous cars- Elon Musk


Robot doctors and lawyers? It’s a change we should embrace

Richard Susskind Nov. 2015


A Da Vinci surgical robot performs a procedure at the Charles Nicolle hospital in Rouen. Nov. 2015


PeerJ Computer Science 2:e93 October 24, 2016

https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.93

https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.93


Big Data Discovery is the combination of Big Data, Data Science and Data Discovery

(Source Gartner)


The Fifth Breakthrough (Source Gartner)


IntuitionTwo key Questions: What is Intuition?

Is Intuition Programmable?

Definition 1 (Rorty): "Intuition is unjustified false belief not preceded by inference; in this (the commonest) sense 'an intuition' means 'a hunch'. The existence of hunches is uncontroversial and not of philosophical interest."


Two more definitions (1)

Definition by Poincaré (1913)

Definition by Euwe (Tilburg, 1964)"The essential element of playing chess at a high level is inspiration. The skill competence of a chess player is based on a multitude of factors, such as directly accessible knowledge, memory, accuracy, ability for combinations, but especially on consolidated experience. De Groot considers the latter as indicative for the distinction between master and non-master. Yet, there are chess masters who (in brief) know everything and see everything and still never will succeed in reaching the highest echelons. It is said that they do not have sufficient imagination. It is thought that these players do not have from time to time a lucid thought, say a hunch." [Emphasis added by vdH]


Two more definitions (2)Definition 2 (De Groot): "Intuition is having judgements (or making

decisions) in a manner that cannot be made explicit."

Definition 3 (Michie): "Intuition is simply a name for rule-based behaviour where the rules are not accessible for consciousness."


The Place of Intuition

Four forms of intuition are

• Mental intuition,• Physical intuition,• Emotional intuition, and• Environmental intuition.


The Model by McWhinney

Grammars of EngagementTHE FOUR MODES

SOURCE DETERMINED VOLUNTARISTIC REFERENCES & COMMENTS

FOUR REALITIES Unitary Sensory Social Mythic McWhinney (1984).

BUDDHIST Samjña Rupa Vedana Samskara Conze (1951).

PLATO Reason Understanding Opinion Perception (faith) of Shadows

Jowett’s terms from The Republic and Gilbert Ryle (1967).

GOSPELS Matthew Mark Luke John (Lion) (Ox) (Man) (Eagle)

The parallels were observed and analyzed by John Lai (1996). The metaphors are from Revelation, 4:7.

LAKOTA INDIAN

North South West East(Buffalo) (Mouse) (Bear) (Eagle)

Storm (1972) writing from a Plains Indian worldview.

JUNG Thinking Sensing Feeling Intuiting Jung’s Personality Types (1920).

LESHAN Clairvoyant Sensory Transpsychic Mythic Lawrence LeShan (1976).Descriptions of exceptional people.

HERMANN Left Left Right RightCerebral Limbic Limbic Cerebral Ned Hermann (1989).

LATOUR

Being External Social Signification Reality Bond and Meaning

Bruno Latour (1991).


From McWhinney

Back to Jung (1920)

Focussing on Intuition

I-Chen Wu

Letty Raaphorst

Aja Huang

Jaap van den Herik

Thinking

Intuiting

Sensing

Feeling

An Instantiation of the Four Modes


Three Friends in the Future

• Big Data

• High Performance Computing

• Deep Learning


Roadmap to Deep LearningArtificial Intelligence 1950-1990

Machine Learning 1990-2000

Adaptivity 2000-2005

Dimension Reduction 2005-2010

Deep Learning 2010-2015

Big Data & HPC 2012-2017

New Statistics 2014-2019


Go for Go for TAAIBack to Go

Back to Aja Huang to Google DeepMind


Google DeepMind 2016


Differences between Chess and Go

Chess GoGame complexity 10^46 10^172Tree evaluation strong point weak pointSearch method minimax (α-β) MCTS

+enhancement +enhancementBreakthrough Tuning parameters Big Data

Search enhancements UnsupervisedReinforcement

LearningHPC HPC+

Currently Komodo 3400 Elo pts AlphaGo defeats Fan Hui

Carlson 2851 Elo pts 5-0 (October 2015) and Lee Sedol 4-1(March

2016)


Match 1: Lee Sedol vs Alpha Go


Game 4: Lee Sedol vs Alpha Go after move 79


Lee Sedol wins Game 4 from AlphaGo


From Erica to AlphaGo


Lee Sedol Congratulates Hassabis


CONCLUSIONS ON GAMES

1. Computers will solve a range of games.

2. New games will emerge.

3. Humans will continuously learn from computers.

4. The Games Research will envisage new games and even more new computer techniques.


CONCLUSIONS ON AIThe new emerging paradigm is:

Understanding the Intuition of a Network that results from a Deep Learning procedure

In summary,Our world is moving from decisions made by humans to decisions made by computers.


THE FUTURE• In 2025, an AI-program is clever, but

not very clever• In 2035, an AI-judge makes verdicts in

plain cases• In 2050, robots will outperform human

soccer teams• In 2080, AI-judges are more competent

in ethical decisions than humans• After 84 years, an AI-program will act

as a full professor in all disciplines


ADVICEThe new future is NOT the end of making decisions (judge, manager, game player or professor). Both humans and robots will:

- address and solve new challenges- improve their experience - develop fully new tracks.

This is a promising perspective.