[zz]Jeopardy, IBM, and Wolfram|Alpha

本文探讨了IBM的Jeopardy项目与Wolfram|Alpha的关系。IBM通过自然语言处理技术构建了一个能在Jeopardy节目中竞争的系统,而Wolfram|Alpha则提供了一种全新的搜索模式——基于精确计算的知识查询。

摘要生成于 C知道 ,由 DeepSeek-R1 满血版支持, 前往体验 >

原文转载stephen wolfram的文章

原文地址http://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2011/01/jeopardy-ibm-and-wolframalpha/

当是情人节大战还没有开始

Jeopardy, IBM, and Wolfram|Alpha

January 26, 2011

About a month before Wolfram|Alpha launched, I was on the phone with a group from IBM, talking about our vision for computable knowledge in Wolfram|Alpha. A few weeks later, the group announced that they were going to use what they had done in natural language processing to try to make a system to compete on Jeopardy.

I thought it was a brilliant way to showcase their work-and IBM's capabilities in general. And now, a year and a half later, IBM has built an impressive level of anticipation for their upcoming Jeopardy television event. Whatever happens (and IBM's system certainly should be able to win), one thing is clear: what IBM is doing will have an important effect in changing peoples' expectations for how they might be able to interact with computers.

When Wolfram|Alpha was launched, people at first kept on referring to it as a "new search engine"-because basically keyword search was the only model they had for how they might find information on a large scale. But IBM's project gives a terrific example of another model: question answering. And when people internalize this model, they'll be coming a lot closer to realizing what's possible with what we're building in Wolfram|Alpha.

So what really is the relation between Wolfram|Alpha and the IBM Jeopardy project?

IBM Watson and Wolfram|Alpha

IBM's basic approach has a long history, with a lineage in the field of information retrieval that is in many ways shared with search engines. The essential idea is to start with textual documents, and then to build a system to statistically match questions that are asked to answers that are represented in the documents. (The first step is to search for textual matches to a question-using thesaurus-like and other linguistic transformations. The harder work is then to take the list of potential answers, use a diversity of different methods to score them, and finally combine these scores to choose a top answer.)

Early versions of this approach go back nearly 50 years, to the first phase of artificial intelligence research. And incremental progress has been made-notably as tracked for the past 20 years in the annual TREC (Text Retrieval Conference) question answering competition. IBM's Jeopardy system is very much in this tradition-though with more sophisticated systems engineering, and with special features aimed at the particular (complex) task of competing on Jeopardy.

Wolfram|Alpha is a completely different kind of thing-something much more radical, based on a quite different paradigm. The key point is that Wolfram|Alpha is not dealing with documents, or anything derived from them. Instead, it is dealing directly with raw, precise, computable knowledge. And what's inside it is not statistical representations of text, but actual representations of knowledge.

The input to Wolfram|Alpha can be a question in natural language. But what Wolfram|Alpha does is to convert this natural language into a precise computable internal form. And then it takes this form, and uses its computable knowledge to compute an answer to the question.

There's a lot of technology and new ideas that are required to make this work. And I must say that when I started out developing Wolfram|Alpha I wasn't at all sure it was going to be possible. But after years of hard work-and some breakthroughs-I'm happy to say it's turned out really well. And Wolfram|Alpha is now successfully answering millions of questions on the web and elsewhere about a huge variety of different topics every day.

And in a sense Wolfram|Alpha fully understands every answer it gives. It's not somehow serving up pieces of statistical matches to documents it was fed. It's actually computing its answers, based on knowledge that it has. And most of the answers it computes are completely new: they've never been computed or written down before.

In IBM's approach, the main part of the work goes into tuning the statistical matching procedures that are used-together in the case of Jeopardy with adding a collection of special rules to handle particular situations that come up.

In Wolfram|Alpha most of the work is just adding computable knowledge to the system. Curating data, hooking up real-time feeds, injecting domain-specific expertise, implementing computational algorithms-and building up our kind of generalized grammar that captures the natural language used for queries.

In developing Wolfram|Alpha, we've been steadily building out different areas of knowledge, concentrating first on ones that address fairly short questions that people ask, and that are important in practice. We're almost exactly at the opposite end of things from what's needed in Jeopardy-and from the direct path that IBM has taken to that goal. There's no doubt that in time Wolfram|Alpha will be able to do things like the Jeopardy task-though in an utterly different way from the IBM system-but that's not what it's built for today.

(It's an interesting metric that Wolfram|Alpha currently knows about three quarters of the entities that arise in Jeopardy questions-which I don't consider too shabby, given that this is pretty far from anything we've actually set up Wolfram|Alpha to do.)

In the last couple of weeks, though, I've gotten curious about what's actually involved in doing the Jeopardy task. Forget Wolfram|Alpha entirely for a moment. What's the most obvious way to try doing Jeopardy?

What about just using a plain old search engine? And just feeding Jeopardy clues into it, and seeing what documents get matched. Well, just for fun, we tried that. We sampled randomly from the 200,000 or so Jeopardy clues that have been aired. Then we took each clue and fed it as input (without quotes) to a search engine. Then we looked at the search engine result page, and (a) saw how frequently the correct Jeopardy answer appeared somewhere in the titles or text snippets on the page, and (b) saw how frequently it appeared in the top document returned by the search engine. (More details are given in this Mathematica notebook [download Player here]. Obviously we excluded sites that are specifically about Jeopardy!)

Search engine comparisons

If nothing else, this gives us pretty interesting information about the modern search engine landscape. In particular, it shows us that the more mature search systems are getting to be remarkably similar in their raw performance-so that other aspects of user experience (like Wolfram|Alpha integration!) are likely to become progressively more important.

But in terms of Jeopardy, what we see is that just using a plain old search engine gets surprisingly far. Of course, the approach here isn't really solving the complete Jeopardy problem: it's only giving pages on which the answer should appear, not giving specific actual answers. One can try various simple strategies for going further. Like getting the answer from the title of the first hit-which with the top search engines actually does succeed about 20% of the time.

But ultimately it's clear that one's going to have to do more work to actually compete on Jeopardy-which is what IBM has done.

So what's the broader significance of the Jeopardy project? It's yet another example of how something that seems like artificial intelligence can be achieved with a system that's in a sense "just doing computation" (and as such, it can be viewed as yet another piece of evidence for the general Principle of Computational Equivalence that's emerged from my work in science).

But at a more practical level, it's related to an activity that has been central to IBM's business throughout its history: handling internal data of corporations and other organizations.

There are typically two general kinds of corporate data: structured (often numerical, and, in the future, increasingly acquired automatically) and unstructured (often textual or image-based). The IBM Jeopardy approach has to do with answering questions from unstructured textual data-with such potential applications as mining medical documents or patents, or doing ediscovery in litigation. It's only rather recently that even search engine methods have become widely used for these kinds of tasks-and with its Jeopardy project approach IBM joins a spectrum of companies trying to go further using natural-language-processing methods.

When it comes to structured corporate data, the Jeopardy project approach is not what's relevant. And instead here there's a large industry based on traditional business intelligence and data mining methods-that in effect allow one to investigate structured data in structured ways.

And it's in this area that there's a particularly obvious breakthrough made possible by the technology of Wolfram|Alpha: being able for the first time to automatically investigate structured data in completely free-form unstructured ways. One asks a question in natural language, and a custom version of Wolfram|Alpha built from particular corporate data can use its computational knowledge and algorithms to compute an answer based on the data-and in fact generate a whole report about the answer.

So what kind of synergy could there be between Wolfram|Alpha and IBM's Jeopardy approach? It didn't happen this time around, but if there's a Watson 2.0, it should be set up to be able to call the Wolfram|Alpha API. IBM apparently already uses a certain amount of structured data and rules in, for example, scoring candidate answers. But what we've found is that even just in natural language processing, there's much more that can be done if one has access to deep broad computational knowledge at every stage. And when it comes to actually answering many kinds of questions, one needs the kind of ability that Wolfram|Alpha has to compute things.

On the other side, in terms of data in Wolfram|Alpha, we mostly concentrate on definitive structured sources. But sometimes there's no choice but to try to extract structured data from unstructured textual sources. In our experience, this is always an unreliable process (achieving at most perhaps 80% correctness)-and so far we mostly use it only to "prime the pump" for later expert curation. But perhaps with something like IBM's Jeopardy approach it'll be possible to get a good supply of probabilistic candidate data answers-that can themselves be used as fodder for the whole Wolfram|Alpha computational knowledge engine system.

It'll be interesting to see what the future holds for all of this. But for now, I shall simply look forward to IBM's appearance on Jeopardy.

IBM has had a long and distinguished history of important R&D-something a disappointingly small number of companies can say today. I have had some good friends at IBM Research (sadly, not all still alive), and IBM as a company has much to be admired. It's great to see IBM putting on such an impressive show, in an area that's so close to my own longstanding interests.

Good luck on Jeopardy! I'll be rooting for you, Watson.

内容概要:本文档详细介绍了基于Python的在线二手电子产品回收系统的设计与实现。项目旨在通过构建一个可靠、安全、透明的平台,提高废旧电子产品的回收率,推动资源的合理再利用,提供安全可靠的交易平台,加强环保意识,促进二手市场的发展,并实现数据驱动的智能化服务。项目面临的主要挑战包括废旧电子产品的检测与评估、信息不对称与交易风险、市场需求的预测与定价、用户体验优化及平台的安全性与数据保护。解决方案涵盖智能化评估与回收定价、高效的二手产品处理流程、完善的售后保障体系、创新的市场需求分析、全程透明化与安全性保障以及定制化用户体验。系统采用微服务架构,包括用户管理、商品评估、交易管理、数据分析、支付与结算等模块。项目还涉及前端界面设计、API接口开发、数据库设计与实现、模型训练与优化、部署与应用等方面。 适合人群:具备一定编程基础,特别是对Python和Web开发有一定了解的研发人员,以及对二手电子产品回收和环保事业感兴趣的从业者。 使用场景及目标:①帮助用户方便地将闲置电子产品回收、交易或再利用,提高废旧电子产品的回收率;②通过智能化的数据分析为用户提供价格评估、市场需求分析等服务,提高回收效率;③提供安全可靠的交易平台,确保交易的公平性和安全性;④推动二手市场的健康发展,为消费者提供经济实惠的产品选择;⑤增强公众的环保意识,推动社会向绿色、低碳方向发展。 其他说明:本文档不仅提供了系统的功能模块设计、数据库表结构、API接口规范,还展示了具体代码实现和GUI界面设计,为开发者提供了全面的技术参考。此外,项目强调了数据安全和隐私保护的重要性,确保平台在运行过程中能够有效保护用户信息。项目未来改进方向包括增强模型的精准度、拓展国际市场、提供更多支付和融资选项、跨平台数据集成与分析、更加智能的回收流程以及强化社交化与社区功能。
内容概要:本文档详细介绍了基于C语言和单片机设计的固态继电器驱动空调温控系统,涵盖了从硬件电路设计、程序设计、GUI设计到代码详解的完整流程。项目旨在实现高效精准的温度控制、提升系统可靠性和寿命、灵活的参数设置和人机交互、降低能耗、模块化设计便于扩展与维护,以及促进智能家居与工业自动化发展。项目通过高精度温度采集与滤波算法、固态继电器驱动与保护电路设计、滞环控制算法、多层次软件模块化设计等创新点,确保系统的高效节能、智能化和高可靠性。; 适合人群:具备一定单片机和C语言编程基础的研发人员,尤其是从事嵌入式系统设计、智能家居和工业自动化领域的工程师。; 使用场景及目标:①实现高效精准的温度控制,确保室内温度维持在理想范围;②提升系统可靠性和寿命,减少故障率和维护成本;③支持灵活的参数设置和用户友好的人机交互界面,提升用户体验;④降低能耗,实现节能控制,推动绿色建筑和节能环保产业的发展;⑤通过模块化设计,便于后续功能升级和系统扩展,如远程监控、数据分析等智能化功能。; 其他说明:项目设计充分考虑了实际应用中的挑战,如温度采集的精度与稳定性、电气兼容性、系统响应速度与控制稳定性、软件设计的资源优化与抗干扰等,提出了针对性的解决方案。系统不仅适用于家庭智能空调,还能广泛应用于工业、商业建筑、医疗环境及农业温室等多个领域。未来改进方向包括智能温度预测与自适应控制、多传感器融合技术应用、远程监控与云平台集成、低功耗与绿色节能优化等。通过该系统,不仅能够精确控制室内温度,保障舒适环境,还能有效节能,延长设备使用寿命,具有重要的实际应用价值和推广意义。
标题基于SpringBoot的学生学习成果管理平台研究AI更换标题第1章引言介绍研究背景、目的、意义以及论文结构。1.1研究背景与目的阐述学生学习成果管理的重要性及SpringBoot技术的优势。1.2研究意义分析该平台对学生、教师及教育机构的意义。1.3论文方法与结构简要介绍论文的研究方法和整体结构。第2章相关理论与技术概述SpringBoot框架、学习成果管理理论及相关技术。2.1SpringBoot框架简介介绍SpringBoot的基本概念、特点及应用领域。2.2学习成果管理理论基础阐述学习成果管理的核心理论和发展趋势。2.3相关技术分析分析平台开发所涉及的关键技术,如数据库、前端技术等。第3章平台需求分析与设计详细分析平台需求,并设计整体架构及功能模块。3.1需求分析从学生、教师、管理员等角度对平台需求进行深入分析。3.2整体架构设计设计平台的整体架构,包括技术架构和逻辑架构。3.3功能模块设计具体设计平台的核心功能模块,如成果展示、数据分析等。第4章平台实现与测试阐述平台的实现过程,并进行功能测试与性能分析。4.1平台实现详细介绍平台的开发环境、关键代码实现及技术难点解决方案。4.2功能测试对平台各项功能进行全面测试,确保功能正确无误。4.3性能分析分析平台的性能指标,如响应时间、并发处理能力等。第5章平台应用与效果评估探讨平台在实际教学中的应用,并对其效果进行评估。5.1平台应用案例选取典型应用案例,展示平台在实际教学中的使用情况。5.2效果评估方法介绍平台效果评估的具体方法和指标。5.3评估结果分析根据评估数据,对平台的应用效果进行深入分析。第6章结论与展望总结论文的主要研究成果,并指出未来研究方向。6.1研究结论概括性地阐述论文的研究结论和主要贡献。6.2研究展望针对当前研究的不足之处,提出未来改进和扩展的方向。
评论
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值