Digital library (interview) RAI Educational

Chung-Jen Tan

Milan - SMAU, 04/10/97

"Deep Blue"

SUMMARY:

  • Deep Blue was an attempt to understand how to solve large complex problems with a computer. Chess is very complex so it is a good model for studying architecture (1).
  • Deep Blue is not really an example of Artificial Intelligence, it is about how to use the computer as a tool to solve problems (2).
  • The way a machine solves problems is completely different from the way the brain solves problems, although they both may arrive at the same result (3).
  • After Deep Blue was defeated in 1996, the programme was improved with the help of chess experts like Joe Benjamin (4).
  • Deep Blue does not understand intuition or psychology and plays the same whoever its opponent is (5).
  • Today we have some applications in the use of AI technologies, like speech recognition, but a computer must make extremely long computations to emulate the human brain and the technology is not yet at that level (6).
  • Humans have always had fears about new technologies, but the better we understand machines, the more they will be able use them to our benefit (7).
  • Today there is a simpler version of Deep Blue, which is about ten times slower and much smaller than the one used against Kasparov (8).
  • The Deep Blue team is now using what they learned from the chess program for private technology and other application areas (9).
  • The computer does not have common sense because we do not yet understand what common sense is (10).

homepage

lezioni


digital library

authorities
subjects
biblioteca digitale

autori

cerca

aiuto

INTERVIEW:

Question 1
Why did you choose the game of chess for this program?

Answer
In 1993 we had this product and we wanted to use chess applications as a way to understand how to solve large complex problems with this computer. Chess is very complex so it's a good model for studying architecture.

Back

Question 2
When we spoke in Mediamente about this game, we spoke about it as part of artificial intelligence (AI), as the computer against the human brain. Is this really the case or is it something else?

Answer
It is not really about AI. The point was to know it better in itself. It is the scientist studying the machine: it is the program that plays the game, that plays chess. So it's about how to program the machine to use it for work. We use the computer as a tool, not to equate the machine to AI.

Back

Question 3
So the structure of the machine is not really modelled on the human brain, but rather as a super computer?

Answer
Yes, the way the machine solves problems is really different from the way the brain solves problems. But in chess, you often arrive at the same result. So we use the machine in a different way. We use machines as a tool. And we can now use this tool to solve very complex problems.

Back

Question 4
Let's talk about the game. What was the difference between the first game that Deep Blue lost and the second one that Deep Blue won?

Answer
The first one was in 1996 and the machine had very little sophisticated chess knowledge. So after we lost to Pascal, we worked with chess experts like Joe Benjamin to try to capture the expert's knowledge and try to put that into the program. This year the machine has not only computed or looked very far ahead it, but also played very accurately with this chess knowledge.

Back

Question 5
One of the Polgar sisters said, if I had been in the place of Kasparov I might have won, because I am a woman which means I have intuition on my side. Do you agree?

Answer
The machine does not understand intuition. The woman solves problems differently, so it doesn't understand intuition or psychology. Therefore, it's not affected by that, so the machine doesn't know if it is playing against Polgar or anyone else.

Back

Question 6
What do you think of the new boundaries of AI. Where do you think we are going to in AI with these new machines? How can it change our lives?

Answer
AI is a very important area for research in the computer area. Many experts are studying AI. But the way the program has to learn to emulate our brain takes tremendously long computations and the technology is not quite there. Today we have some applications in the use of AI technologies like speech recognition. If you talk to a machine, often then the machine can recognise your voice and therefore it can accept your voice and transfer that into digital information. So there are areas which are making progress. But there are very large general problems which will take many years to solve.

Back

Question 7
A lot of people are afraid of the power of these machines. Is there a real risk that they may take over from human beings?

Answer
Historically we have been afraid of machines taking over every time we have new tools, new technology. In the industrial age people are afraid that the machines will take over. But they make our lives better. So the more we understand technology, the more we understand how to use the machines, and hopefully we will use them to our benefit. It is important to make people aware of technology and how technology can help us solve problems.

Back

Question 8
Now there's a new model of Deep Blue, a sort of home model.

Answer
You mean the small version. Today we're using the small version of Deep Blue which has only one processor. It's about ten times slower and is much smaller than the one used with Gary Kasparov. Eventually, this will be another personal computer. We already have many chess programs on the personal computer. So technology is always improving and every day that goes by, the more things we can do with computers.

Back

Question 9
Deep Blue as a concept, as a team of people working together towards something, is finished or is it going to expand into something else?

Answer
For the team we will now use what we learned from the chess program Deep Blue for private technology and for many other applications areas. For instance, we have already started to apply this to help us find better drugs by using this computer to simulate molecules so they can combine to form drugs much faster with the help of a machine like this.

Back

Question 10
It's difficult to give the computer the basic common sense that characterises human beings. Although on the other hand, I don't know if we have so much common sense...

Answer
The computer doesn't have common sense because we don't understand what common sense is. That's the problem we have. It we understood that, then maybe we could give the computer common sense too.

Back

back to the top