A cat is on a mat.

The AI Ladder says (page 5) that 81% of business leaders are confused about artificial intelligence.  Personally, it has been my observation that about 99.9% of not only business leaders, but also technical professionals and I am coming to find even including AI researchers are confused about the real capabilities and potential of AI.  What is my basis for reaching the conclusion that I have reached?  Well, about 20+ years of working to make XBRL-based reporting work and reading the book The Myth of Artificial Intelligence: Why Computers Can't Think the Way We Do.  I also have some background in formal logic which does help.  I am no expert in AI, but I am really good at understand what does and does not work and testing. While I am no AI expert, I am very qualitied to ask really good questions.

Hype, hype, hype.  For example, Elon Musk has promised full self driving cars since 2015.  So how is that going?  I really like Elon and what Elon and Tesla and SpaceX are doing.  But come on.  I learned early in my accounting career to never trust a software vendor.  You certainly don't want to trust any AI software vendor right now.  You need to test and verify what these people claim.  And most business leaders have no clue how to test and verify claims of AI software vendors. Most AI is little better than cheap parlor tricks.  This puts business leaders in a really risky position.

I am not quite done with reading The Myth of Artificial Intelligence yet.  I will lay out what I understand from that, and I am understanding a lot, later.  If you, like me, are tired of being bamboozled by snake oil salesmen; consider following my blog for the next two or three months.

For starters, to understand artificial intelligence, you need to understand the difference between "syntax" and "semantics".  That is not all you need to understand, but that is a start.

So, how do you communicate, "A cat is on a mat," such that a computer can understand what you are communicating?  Here are several different technical syntax alternatives (examples):

Which alternative do you like best?  Probably the one in the lower right hand corner, "A cat is on a mat."

After you have articulated the information in a technical syntax, you still have to break down the semantics (the meaning) of what is carried within that technical syntax. My blog post, Logic Programming and Theories, points out different approaches for articulating the semantics or the meaning conveyed within that technical syntax.  That meaning needs to be understandable to machines so that they can perform work and also understandable to humans so that they can check to be sure the meaning conveyed is correct.

There are exactly three ways to get the meaning conveyed by some technical syntax into a form that a computer based process can effectively understand:
  1. Humans put the meaning they want to convey into some machine-readable form.
  2. Machines read the technical syntax and convert that technical syntax into machine understandable meaning.
  3. Humans and machines work together to get the meaning into a form that is understandable by machines.
Each of the three approaches has a basket of PROS and a basket of CONS.  To avoid building a fragile house of cards that will come crashing down on you, you need to have a clear understanding of those PROS and CONS. Business leaders need to peel away all of the hype and hyperbole.

Understand the above; I will keep going in the next installment.

Additional Information: 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Getting Started with Auditchain Luca (now called Luca Suite)

Image
(Note that a newer, production version as opposed to only the development version , of Luca Suite is available) The Innovator's Dilemma points out that disruptive innovations often look like toys that are doing everything wrong. Auditchain Luca , which is part of the Auditchain Suite , is a unique approach to creating a knowledge graph .  To experience using Auditchain Luca, have a look at the Getting Started with Auditchain Luca instructions. Be sure to grab the Excel and JSON import files used for this getting started exercise.   This getting started exercise uses one of several different approaches to getting information into a tool for constructing and viewing professional quality knowledge graphs .  Additional getting started guides will be made available over time. Auditchain Luca might not make sense to you if you don't understand the paradigm shift that is occurring and if you have not shifted your mental map. For the next step in your journey, consider t...
Read more

Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS)

Image
Relational Knowledge Graph System (RKGS) is an interesting idea that combines the relational paradigm and the knowledge graph paradigm.  This documentation, Why RKGS , explains the idea. This gets even more interesting with the notion of "relational AI".  RelationalAI is described as follows by the company of the same name, Relational.ai : “RelationalAI is a cloud-based relational knowledge graph management system, with state of the art probabilistic processing and declarative reasoning at scale to make developing Data Applications a superpower for your business.” This notion of knowledge graphs represented in relational databases fits into my belief that knowledge graphs have two aspects: the expression SYNTAX and the logic of what is expressed or SEMANTICS. While the LOGIC of a knowledge graph is always the same regardless of technical syntax used to express that logic; there are many, many different technical syntaxes that can be used to represent a knowledge graph. There...
Read more

Professional System for Creating Financial Reports Leveraging Knowledge Graphs

Image
The document Professional System for Creating Financial Reports Leveraging Knowledge Graphs explains a new approach, a new paradigm, for creating financial reports.  The document provides a practical, nontechnical description of a professional system for creating provably high-quality financial reports where the report creator is using financial reporting schemes (such as US GAAP and IFRS) where report creator is permitted to modify the report model which leverages global standard knowledge graphs represented using XBRL. This new approach is useful, it is highly novel, and the details were highly complicated to pull together.  This is certainly not an incremental innovation.  It is definitely a disruptive innovation and it could very well be a foundational innovation. You can decide which for yourself. Foundational technologies have two dimensions that need to be considered: novelty and complexity. The more novel the technology is, the more effort needed to ensure users ...
Read more