Like “ Between the DEVIL
and the DEEP SEA “
In the “ Battle of the Robots “
, will human race parish ?
Stephen Hawking
and Elon Musk have
been asking that question even before the following report appeared in media
yesterday :
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Google’s DeepMind pits AI against AI to
see if they fight or cooperate
In the
future, it’s likely that many aspects of human society will be controlled —
either partly or wholly — by artificial
intelligence.
AI computer
agents could manage systems from the quotidian (e.g., traffic lights) to the
complex (e.g., a nation’s whole economy), but leaving aside the problem of
whether or not they can do their jobs well, there is another challenge:
Will these
agents be able to play nice with one another? What happens if one AI’s aims
conflict with another’s? Will they fight, or work together?
Google’s AI subsidiary DeepMind has been exploring this problem
in a new study published today. The company’s researchers decided to
test how AI agents interacted with one another in a series of “social dilemmas.”
This is a rather generic term for situations in which
individuals can profit from being selfish — but where everyone loses if everyone is
selfish.
The most famous example of this is the prisoner’s dilemma, where two individuals can choose
to betray one another for a prize, but lose out if both choose this option.
As explained in a blog post from
DeepMind, the company’s researchers tested how AI agents would
perform in these sorts of situations, by dropping them into a pair of very
basic video games.
In the first
game, Gathering, two player
have to collect apples from a central pile.
They have
the option of “tagging” the other
player with a laser
beam, temporarily removing them from
the game, and giving
the first player a chance to collect more apples.
In the second game, Wolfpack,
two players have to hunt a third in an environment filled with obstacles. Points are claimed not just by the player that captures the prey, but by all players near to the prey when it’s
captured.
What the researchers found was interesting, but
perhaps not surprising: the AI agents altered their behavior, becoming more
cooperative or antagonistic, depending on the context.
For example,
with the Gathering game, when apples were in plentiful supply, the agents didn’t really
bother zapping one another with the laser beam. But, when stocks dwindled, the
amount of zapping increased.
Most
interestingly, perhaps, was when a more computationally-powerful agent was introduced into the
mix, it tended to zap the other player regardless of how many apples there were.
That is to
say, the cleverer AI
decided it was better to be aggressive in all situations.
AI AGENTS VARIED THEIR
STRATEGY BASED ON THE RULES OF THE GAME
Does that mean that the AI agent thinks being combative is the “best” strategy ?
Not necessarily. The researchers hypothesize that the
increase in zapping behavior by the more-advanced AI was simply because the act
of zapping itself is computationally challenging.
The agent has to aim its weapon at the other player and track their movement —
activities which require more computing power, and which take up valuable
apple-gathering time. Unless the agent knows these strategies will pay off,
it’s easier just to cooperate.
Conversely, in the Wolfpack game,
the cleverer the AI agent, the more likely it was to cooperate with other
players. As the researchers explain, this is because learning to work with the
other player to track and herd the prey requires more computational power.
The results of the study, then, show that the behavior
of AI agents changes based on the rules they’re faced with.
If those rules
reward aggressive behavior (“Zap that player to get more apples”) the AI will
be more aggressive; if they rewards cooperative
behavior (“Work together and you both get points!) they’ll be more cooperative.
That means
part of the challenge in controlling AI agents in the future, will be making
sure the right rules are in place.
As the
researchers conclude in their blog post:
“As a consequence [of this research], we may be able to better understand and
control complex multi-agent systems such as the economy, traffic systems, or
the ecological health of our planet - all of which depend on our continued
cooperation.”
I have no
doubts that the DeepMind ( and its opponent AI ) are quite capable to substitute on their very own , words / concepts , as follows :
Collect = Immobilize
/ Apple = Humans
/ Central Pile = World
/ Tagging = Shortlisting
/ Laser Beam = Zero-in
/ Removing = Eliminating
/ Game = War
/ Hunt = Chase
/ Capture = Imprison
/ Prey = Target
/ Obstacles = Shields
/ Antagonistic = Inimical
/ Zap = Kill
/ Combative = Aggressive
/ Weapon = Anthrax
– Nerve Gas – Nuclear
Missile..etc
How does
that worry Elon Musk ?
Here
is a report from Economic Times ( 16 Feb 2017 ) :
As one of the premier figures in the tech industry, Elon Musk’s words do
carry a certain weight.
So when he says that humans need to become half organic, half machine
beings in order to survive the future, the concept starts sounding a lot less
silly than it would have.
Of course, scientists have been suggesting that becoming part machine is
inevitable down the road. With artificial intelligence expected to spread in a few years,
however, it has become a necessity.
The work on machine learning and
the AI industry, in
general, is progressing at a rapid rate, with companies vying to be the first
to produce a fully functional model that can serve as the ultimate smart assistant and more.
This is exactly what the Tesla
CEO was warning the world about during his speech at the World Government
Summit, which was held in Dubai, CNBC reports.
"Over time I think we will probably see a closer merger of biological intelligence and
digital intelligence," Musk said. "It's mostly about the
bandwidth, the speed of the connection between your brain and the digital
version of yourself, particularly output."
According to Musk, this is important
because communication is
going to be the deciding factor when it comes to supremacy between
machines and their original creators.
As he explains it, today’s average
machine is capable of communicating millions, if not trillions of bits per
second. This allows them to perform multiple tasks without much effort. In
contrast, humans can communicate at about 10 bits a second.
As to how this is going to be
accomplished exactly, there have been several methods proposed over the decades, none of
which have yet to bear fruit in a practical manner.
All Musk knows is that if humans
don’t learn to adapt to have faster communication capabilities, they risk
getting overrun by
machines, The Verge reports. It’s already
happening now.
Dear Elon ,
It is
unlikely that humans will , any time soon , develop a “ method “ to think and communicate, as fast
as computers
But you
may feel reassured that the human race need not get overrun by machines if that “ Ultimate Smart Assistance “ takes the form of :
And ,
Each and
every Robot is embedded with :
If that
can be pulled off , we need not fear,
16 Feb
2017
