Norvig vs. Chomsky and the fight for the future of AI
June 29, 2011
Linguist Noam Chomsky has derided researchers in machine learning who use purely statistical methods to produce behavior that mimics something in the world, but who don’t try to understand the meaning of that behavior, points out Kevin Gold, an Assistant Professor at Rochester Institute of Technology.
Google’s Director of Research Peter Norvig has argued that there are ways of doing statistical reasoning that are more sophisticated than looking at just the previous one or two words, even if they aren’t applied as often in practice. But his fundamental stance, which he calls the “algorithmic modeling culture,” is to believe that “nature’s black box cannot necessarily be described by a simple model.” He likens Chomsky’s quest for a more beautiful model to Platonic mysticism,
Comments (1)
by geekette
The arena of emotional intelligence is where these two opposing camps will meet and have the final show down. Whether or not stats are enough depends entirely on the application or context of its use and users expectations. We must not forget, an AI system exists in relation to its users or other systems.
To the extent an AI technique is USEFUL, it is good. Can machine learning stats model or keep up with a user who needs emotional comforting or common sense about culture, social or relationships?
I have worked with the problem of emotional computing for some time, and also with medical patients. Its the mother of all problems.
My money is on a marriage between these two opposing views.