39 ms·

Judea Pearl, big brain behind AI, wins Turing Award (Nobel Prize in Computing)

107 points by alphadoggs 15y ago

marcf 15y ago
He is an awesome scientist and has made real contributions to the field computer science. It is unfortunate that in his politics he a very right wing pro-Israel type that supports attacks on Palestinian NGOs and even left-wing Israeli groups. He is on the board of NGO Monitor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO_Monitor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO_Monitor
- aheilbut 15y ago
  The horror! Attacking NGOs by writing reports on their activities. Unlike, say, firing rockets, or kidnapping and decapitating people.
  - marcf 15y ago
    The NGO Monitor aims to undermine non-violent actions against the Israeli occupation in order to maintain it. It tries to cut funding to peaceful NGOs because they don't align with Zionist values. NGO Monitor is pro-occupation and pro-Israeli settlers. So your response seems to be out of place. I criticize A, you say "but B" which is unrelated to A as a counter argument.
    - anamax 15y ago
      > It tries to cut funding to peaceful NGOs because they don't align with Zionist values. Ah yes, "Peaceful NGOs".... Even if they are "peaceful" (many aren't), that doesn't imply that they're good. There's nothing inherently wrong with attacking NGOs. In fact, it's actually good to attack some NGOs because said NGOs are evil. The fact that you've taken a side does not imply that the other side is wrong to oppose your side, let alone that this guy has done anything wrong in his opposition. .
      - marcf 15y ago
        I am against the occupation
        anamax 15y ago
        > I am against the occupation Unless you're one of those evil "By any means necessary" folk, that statement tells us nothing about whether these NGOs are evil.
  - ArbitraryLimits 15y ago
    > kidnapping and decapitating people In case anyone else didn't pick up on this right away, Judea Pearl is the father of Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter who was kidnapped and decapitated in Pakistan.
- andyjohnson0 15y ago
  I'm personally sympathetic with your comments on his politics, but the only part of your comment that is relevant here is "He is an awesome scientist and has made real contributions to the field computer science." According to Wikipedia he is the father of Daniel Pearl, the journalist who was murdered by al-Qaeda. This may colour his views on things.
- theorique 15y ago
  Translation: being supportive of Israel, his country of origin, is unfortunate? And what does this have to do with his merits as a computer scientist, which is the main subject under discussion.
- scott_s 15y ago
  I flagged your post, and since you're relatively new here, I figured I should explain why. Simply, no good discussion will happen based on your comment. It will devolve into a political discussion, which while important, is not relevant to the purpose of this site. I specifically flagged your post instead of downvoting it so that the entire discussion about the award and his contributions are not derailed.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
ajays 15y ago
It saddens me a little to see the " (Nobel Price in Computing) " in the headline. This is HackerNews! People here are expected to know what the Turing Award is; if they don't, they can find out for themselves.
- k-mcgrady 15y ago
  I don't see what the problem is in helping people who don't know what it is. There's no harm in saving people from having to do a search to find out.
  - wl 15y ago
    The problem is that the headline is wrong and the Turing Award isn't a Nobel Prize. It may be similar in prestige to a Nobel, but it is awarded by different people. Maybe there is no harm in saving people from having to do a search, but there is harm in being misleading.
- switz 15y ago
  I don't know if it saddened me, but I found it quite unnecessary. This[1] was interesting however: why there is no Nobel Prize in Computing. [1] http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/060611-nobel-prize-computing.html http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/060611-nobel-prize-com...
- utopkara 15y ago
  I am torn between the urge to move to another news sharing site where people know who Turing is, and the thought that a little diversity can do good. I guess the latter wins, because I come here to get surprised, and learn; it doesn't happen as much when you are around people like yourself.
- huherto 15y ago
  Yes, we know. But it is a good way tell the general population that the Turing Award is the most prestigious award in computer science.
andyjohnson0 15y ago
I'd like to see some comments on his contributions to AI. Wikipedia says his work is applicable to cognitive modelling. Anyone want to comment?
- Dn_Ab 15y ago
  Basically he brought Bayesian Networks to machine learning. He did a lot in their structure and in particular efficient/approximate inference on Bayesian Networks. He has been contributing brilliant ideas since the early 80s I think. Search belief propagation, junction tree algo, markov blanket, belief propagation statistical physics. The last search showing his ideas finding use beyond where he introduced them. Whenever ideas keep showing uses in different places especially in something as well evinced as the thermodynamic/information link then you know you have done something profound.
  - ArbitraryLimits 15y ago
    A few years ago I looked up his earliest papers, and it's interesting that his work on Bayesian networks essentially seemed to start as an effort to detect causality among sets of random variables, i.e. given a Bayesian network, which random variables can be said to "cause" others? Of course, Bayesian networks start by assuming you know every random variable's distribution, so verifying independence is easy but finding it is hard. I've always thought an interesting research project would be to try the same approach with correlation functions instead of distributions, and see how far you can get.
- skystorm 15y ago
  Well, as the linked article says, he basically coined the term "Bayesian network" and developed much of the underlying theory (e.g., which kind of independencies it can/cannot capture). This was arguably a crucial step for many areas of modern AI in terms of dealing with uncertainty, cf. the full ACM press release: http://www.acm.org/press-room/news-releases/2012/turing-award-11/ http://www.acm.org/press-room/news-releases/2012/turing-awar... He is also credited with first describing the ever-popular belief propagation algorithm for approximate reasoning in Bayesian networks and graphical models in general. Edit -- I found this to be a nice, short exposition: http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r368.pdf http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r368.pdf
cing 15y ago
His work on causal inference was featured recently on Michael Nielsen's blog: http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/if-correlation-doesnt-imply-causation-then-what-does/ http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/if-correlation-doesnt-impl... http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/guest-post-judea-pearl-on-correlation-causation-and-the-psychology-of-simpsons-paradox/ http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/guest-post-judea-pearl-on-...
eric_bullington 15y ago
Pearl won the Turing Award for his work applying Bayesian analysis to machine learning, among other accomplishments. For HNers just out of college, it's important to note that Bayesian analysis has not always been as popular as it is now. In fact, even as recently as the 1990s, it was regarded with suspicion by many statisticians, who strongly disliked the idea that prior and posterior distributions are meant to represent subjective states of belief. I was fortunate enough to have a very progressive statistics professor in undergrad in the 1990s, who was interested in Bayesian analysis. It's my understanding that most upper-level statistics and probability coursework avoided doing much Bayesian analysis until around the turn of the millennium. (if you went to university in the 1990s or earlier, was this your experience?). For those interested in learning more about this topic, an excellent book on the history of the Bayes theorem controversies was recently published by Yale Unviersity Press: _The Theory That Would Not Die_ by Sharon Bertsch McGrayne To be fair to Judea Pearl, I do see that he wrote an essay entitled, "Bayesianism and causality, or, why I am only half-bayesian". Nonetheless, much of his work appears to involve what we now know as Bayesian analysis. So like many (all?) scientists who make major breakthroughs, Judea Pearl was going against the accepted understanding of probability by pushing Bayesian analysis in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. It's good to see his daring rewarded.
- alan-crowe 15y ago
  I'm trying to persuade people to abandon the terminology of "subjective" versus "objective" and talk instead of "individual" versus "situational" versus "transcendental". If the simple counting argument (that you cannot talk sensibly about three possibilities using only two words) does not convince, worry instead that law and science put the subjective/objective boundary in different places. http://www.cawtech.freeserve.co.uk/prob.2.html http://www.cawtech.freeserve.co.uk/prob.2.html
- _delirium 15y ago
  Part of the reason Bayesian analysis was avoided was because, prior to Pearl's work, inference was impractical in non-toy examples. A major contribution of Pearl's work was to make it feasible, by structuring the probability distributions as Bayesian networks that limited the possible dependencies, coupled with the belief-propagation algorithm to do approximate updates. I don't see Pearl as primarily interested in the Bayesian v. frequentist debate himself, though, but rather in how to efficiently do probabilistic reasoning in non-trivial problems in general, with a heavy tilt towards questions of representing causality. Methodologically his work over the years has used all sorts of things from various camps; for example, he was also an authority in the early 1980s on heuristic search.
HardyLeung 15y ago
Congrats to Professor Judea Pearl! Though I did not take any of his classes when I was at UCLA, in chance encounters he gave me a very good impression - nice, intelligent, and unassuming. I ended up using a lot of his materials (Bayesian analysis) after college in my projects... Here's a Tagxedo I made of today's announcement in the shape of UCLA's logo: http://daily.tagxedo.com/march-15-uclas-judea-pearl-named-2011-winner http://daily.tagxedo.com/march-15-uclas-judea-pearl-named-20...
jarrodvanda 15y ago
For those who don't know he is also the father of Daniel Pearl

107 points by alphadoggs 15y ago

marcf 15y ago

He is an awesome scientist and has made real contributions to the field computer science. It is unfortunate that in his politics he a very right wing pro-Israel type that supports attacks on Palestinian NGOs and even left-wing Israeli groups. He is on the board of NGO Monitor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO_Monitor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO_Monitor

aheilbut 15y ago
The horror! Attacking NGOs by writing reports on their activities. Unlike, say, firing rockets, or kidnapping and decapitating people.
- marcf 15y ago
  The NGO Monitor aims to undermine non-violent actions against the Israeli occupation in order to maintain it. It tries to cut funding to peaceful NGOs because they don't align with Zionist values. NGO Monitor is pro-occupation and pro-Israeli settlers. So your response seems to be out of place. I criticize A, you say "but B" which is unrelated to A as a counter argument.
  - anamax 15y ago
    > It tries to cut funding to peaceful NGOs because they don't align with Zionist values. Ah yes, "Peaceful NGOs".... Even if they are "peaceful" (many aren't), that doesn't imply that they're good. There's nothing inherently wrong with attacking NGOs. In fact, it's actually good to attack some NGOs because said NGOs are evil. The fact that you've taken a side does not imply that the other side is wrong to oppose your side, let alone that this guy has done anything wrong in his opposition. .
    - marcf 15y ago
      I am against the occupation
      - anamax 15y ago
        > I am against the occupation Unless you're one of those evil "By any means necessary" folk, that statement tells us nothing about whether these NGOs are evil.
- ArbitraryLimits 15y ago
  > kidnapping and decapitating people In case anyone else didn't pick up on this right away, Judea Pearl is the father of Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter who was kidnapped and decapitated in Pakistan.
andyjohnson0 15y ago
I'm personally sympathetic with your comments on his politics, but the only part of your comment that is relevant here is "He is an awesome scientist and has made real contributions to the field computer science." According to Wikipedia he is the father of Daniel Pearl, the journalist who was murdered by al-Qaeda. This may colour his views on things.
theorique 15y ago
Translation: being supportive of Israel, his country of origin, is unfortunate? And what does this have to do with his merits as a computer scientist, which is the main subject under discussion.
scott_s 15y ago
I flagged your post, and since you're relatively new here, I figured I should explain why. Simply, no good discussion will happen based on your comment. It will devolve into a political discussion, which while important, is not relevant to the purpose of this site. I specifically flagged your post instead of downvoting it so that the entire discussion about the award and his contributions are not derailed.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

ajays 15y ago

It saddens me a little to see the " (Nobel Price in Computing) " in the headline. This is HackerNews! People here are expected to know what the Turing Award is; if they don't, they can find out for themselves.

k-mcgrady 15y ago
I don't see what the problem is in helping people who don't know what it is. There's no harm in saving people from having to do a search to find out.
- wl 15y ago
  The problem is that the headline is wrong and the Turing Award isn't a Nobel Prize. It may be similar in prestige to a Nobel, but it is awarded by different people. Maybe there is no harm in saving people from having to do a search, but there is harm in being misleading.
switz 15y ago
I don't know if it saddened me, but I found it quite unnecessary. This[1] was interesting however: why there is no Nobel Prize in Computing. [1] http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/060611-nobel-prize-computing.html http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/060611-nobel-prize-com...
utopkara 15y ago
I am torn between the urge to move to another news sharing site where people know who Turing is, and the thought that a little diversity can do good. I guess the latter wins, because I come here to get surprised, and learn; it doesn't happen as much when you are around people like yourself.
huherto 15y ago
Yes, we know. But it is a good way tell the general population that the Turing Award is the most prestigious award in computer science.

andyjohnson0 15y ago

I'd like to see some comments on his contributions to AI. Wikipedia says his work is applicable to cognitive modelling. Anyone want to comment?

Dn_Ab 15y ago
Basically he brought Bayesian Networks to machine learning. He did a lot in their structure and in particular efficient/approximate inference on Bayesian Networks. He has been contributing brilliant ideas since the early 80s I think. Search belief propagation, junction tree algo, markov blanket, belief propagation statistical physics. The last search showing his ideas finding use beyond where he introduced them. Whenever ideas keep showing uses in different places especially in something as well evinced as the thermodynamic/information link then you know you have done something profound.
- ArbitraryLimits 15y ago
  A few years ago I looked up his earliest papers, and it's interesting that his work on Bayesian networks essentially seemed to start as an effort to detect causality among sets of random variables, i.e. given a Bayesian network, which random variables can be said to "cause" others? Of course, Bayesian networks start by assuming you know every random variable's distribution, so verifying independence is easy but finding it is hard. I've always thought an interesting research project would be to try the same approach with correlation functions instead of distributions, and see how far you can get.
skystorm 15y ago
Well, as the linked article says, he basically coined the term "Bayesian network" and developed much of the underlying theory (e.g., which kind of independencies it can/cannot capture). This was arguably a crucial step for many areas of modern AI in terms of dealing with uncertainty, cf. the full ACM press release: http://www.acm.org/press-room/news-releases/2012/turing-award-11/ http://www.acm.org/press-room/news-releases/2012/turing-awar... He is also credited with first describing the ever-popular belief propagation algorithm for approximate reasoning in Bayesian networks and graphical models in general. Edit -- I found this to be a nice, short exposition: http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r368.pdf http://ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r368.pdf

cing 15y ago

His work on causal inference was featured recently on Michael Nielsen's blog: http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/if-correlation-doesnt-imply-causation-then-what-does/ http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/if-correlation-doesnt-impl... http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/guest-post-judea-pearl-on-correlation-causation-and-the-psychology-of-simpsons-paradox/ http://www.michaelnielsen.org/ddi/guest-post-judea-pearl-on-...

eric_bullington 15y ago

Pearl won the Turing Award for his work applying Bayesian analysis to machine learning, among other accomplishments. For HNers just out of college, it's important to note that Bayesian analysis has not always been as popular as it is now. In fact, even as recently as the 1990s, it was regarded with suspicion by many statisticians, who strongly disliked the idea that prior and posterior distributions are meant to represent subjective states of belief. I was fortunate enough to have a very progressive statistics professor in undergrad in the 1990s, who was interested in Bayesian analysis. It's my understanding that most upper-level statistics and probability coursework avoided doing much Bayesian analysis until around the turn of the millennium. (if you went to university in the 1990s or earlier, was this your experience?). For those interested in learning more about this topic, an excellent book on the history of the Bayes theorem controversies was recently published by Yale Unviersity Press: _The Theory That Would Not Die_ by Sharon Bertsch McGrayne To be fair to Judea Pearl, I do see that he wrote an essay entitled, "Bayesianism and causality, or, why I am only half-bayesian". Nonetheless, much of his work appears to involve what we now know as Bayesian analysis. So like many (all?) scientists who make major breakthroughs, Judea Pearl was going against the accepted understanding of probability by pushing Bayesian analysis in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. It's good to see his daring rewarded.

alan-crowe 15y ago
I'm trying to persuade people to abandon the terminology of "subjective" versus "objective" and talk instead of "individual" versus "situational" versus "transcendental". If the simple counting argument (that you cannot talk sensibly about three possibilities using only two words) does not convince, worry instead that law and science put the subjective/objective boundary in different places. http://www.cawtech.freeserve.co.uk/prob.2.html http://www.cawtech.freeserve.co.uk/prob.2.html
_delirium 15y ago
Part of the reason Bayesian analysis was avoided was because, prior to Pearl's work, inference was impractical in non-toy examples. A major contribution of Pearl's work was to make it feasible, by structuring the probability distributions as Bayesian networks that limited the possible dependencies, coupled with the belief-propagation algorithm to do approximate updates. I don't see Pearl as primarily interested in the Bayesian v. frequentist debate himself, though, but rather in how to efficiently do probabilistic reasoning in non-trivial problems in general, with a heavy tilt towards questions of representing causality. Methodologically his work over the years has used all sorts of things from various camps; for example, he was also an authority in the early 1980s on heuristic search.

HardyLeung 15y ago

Congrats to Professor Judea Pearl! Though I did not take any of his classes when I was at UCLA, in chance encounters he gave me a very good impression - nice, intelligent, and unassuming. I ended up using a lot of his materials (Bayesian analysis) after college in my projects... Here's a Tagxedo I made of today's announcement in the shape of UCLA's logo: http://daily.tagxedo.com/march-15-uclas-judea-pearl-named-2011-winner http://daily.tagxedo.com/march-15-uclas-judea-pearl-named-20...

jarrodvanda 15y ago

For those who don't know he is also the father of Daniel Pearl