4 ms·
Instead of a rigorous CS oriented paper, it (the article referenced by Dr. Rudin) seems more like an editorial on the risks of using AI for consequential decisi
by WhitneyLand 4y ago
Instead of a rigorous CS oriented paper, it (the article referenced by Dr. Rudin) seems more like an editorial on the risks of using AI for consequential decisions. It proposes using simpler models and the benefits of explainable vs interpretable AI in these cases.
However it seems to deal more with problems of perception in AI and how things might be better in the ideal rather than present any specific results.
Maybe I’m missing something, not sure of the insight here? I agree it’s an important issue and laudable goal.
- topspin 4y agoThe paper content might not be all that but the fact of its existence is interesting to me. Lines are being drawn around what AI can be permitted to engage; if the methods aren't understood then they can't be controlled, and there are large domains where the Powers That Be won't tolerate what they can't control. Of course, it is at least as likely that the outcomes are actually less arbitrary than the conventional, and this this is what causes consternation.