Download - The Future of (Artificial) Intelligence
The Future of (Artificial) Intelligence
Stuart RussellUniversity of California, BerkeleyUniversité Pierre et Marie Curie
To create intelligent systems
Why are we doing AI?
To create intelligent systems The more intelligent, the better
Why are we doing AI?
To create intelligent systems The more intelligent, the better
We believe we can succeed Limited only by ingenuity and
physics
Why are we doing AI?
An attempt will be made to find how to make machines use language, form abstractions and concepts, solve kinds of problems now reserved for humans, and improve themselves. We think that a significant advance can be made if [we] work on it together for a summer.
John McCarthy and Claude ShannonDartmouth Workshop Proposal, 1956
To create intelligent systems The more intelligent, the better
To gain a better understanding of human intelligence
Why are we doing AI?
To create intelligent systems The more intelligent, the better
To gain a better understanding of human intelligence
To magnify those benefits that flow from it
Why are we doing AI?
Anil Ananthaswamy, “I, Algorithm: A new dawn for AI,” New Scientist, Jan 29, 2011
Once performance exceeds a minimum level, small improvements are worth billions Speech Text understanding Object recognition Automated vehicles Domestic robots
An industry arms race
Military arms race
“The first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make.” I. J. Good, 1965
Might help us avoid war and ecological catastrophes, achieve immortality and expand throughout the universe
Success would be the biggest event in human history
What if we do succeed?
“The first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make.” I. J. Good, 1965
Might help us avoid war and ecological catastrophes, achieve immortality and expand throughout the universe
Success would be the biggest event in human history … and perhaps the last
What if we do succeed?
Along what paths will AI evolve?
What is the (plausibly reachable) best case? Worst case?
Can we affect the future of AI? Technical or societal solutions? What should we do now?
So, if that matters…..
If a superior alien civilization sent us email saying, “We’ll arrive in 30-50 years”, would we just reply, “OK, call us when you get here, we’ll leave the light on”?
The AI community needs a substantial institutional commitment, reasonably soon
This needs serious thought
Rutherford (1933): anyone who looks for a source of power in the transformation of the atoms is talking moonshine.
Sept 12, 1933: The stoplight changed to green. Szilárd stepped off the curb. As he crossed the street time cracked open before him and he saw a way to the future, death into the world and all our woes, the shape of things to come.
Szilard (1934): patent on nuclear chain reaction; kept secret
Precedent: Nuclear Physics
Hahn et al (1939): uranium fissionSzilard and Fermi (1939): uranium chain reaction. “That night, there was very little doubt in my mind that the world was headed for grief.”
Einstein/Szilard (1939): letter to Pres. Roosevelt urging development of nuclear weapons before Nazis
Szilard et 70 al (1945): petition to end war by inviting Japanese to A-bomb test
Emergency Committee of Atomic Scientists
Precedent: Nuclear Physics
1925 Geneva Protocol banned use in warfare, but R&D, stockpiling continued
Long negotiations (until 1972 for biological, 1992 for chemical weapons)
1975 (biological) and 1997 (chemical) treaties ban “development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, transfer or use”
Precedent: Chemical and Biological Weapons
1973-4: Paul Berg stopped his own experiment to insert carcinogenic virus DNA into E. coli; prominent scientists request a moratorium on recombinant DNA experiments
Asilomar conference (1975) set up guidelines: Physical, biological containment; risk
analysis Ban on disease/toxin organism manipulation
Credited with avoiding restrictive legislation
Industry compliance via FDA controls on sales
Precedent: Genetic Engineering
NIH Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee will not approve any protocol modifying human germline
Cartagena Protocol (2003) governs trade in GMOs, enshrines precautionary principle
2010: Pres. Commission proposes federal oversight of synthetic biology activities
2012: 100+ NGOs call for worldwide moratorium
Precedent: Genetic Engineering
MIRI, FHI, CSER, FLI, etc.AAAI task force (Horvitz & Selman)US Air Force: Test, Evaluation, Verification, and Validation for Autonomy
The process is beginning
MIRI, FHI, CSER, FLI, etc.AAAI task force (Horvitz & Selman)US Air Force: Test, Evaluation, Verification, and Validation for Autonomy
Today’s meeting
The process is beginning
1.00-1.30 Introductions (Russell)1.30-1.50 Robots (Veloso)1.50-2.10 Intelligence explosion (Dewey)2.10-2.30 Unintended consequences (Shanahan)2.30-2.50 Autonomous trading (Wellman)2.50-3.10 Ontology, organizations (Mallah)3.10-3.30 break3.30-5.00 Technical research agenda5.00-6.30 Organizational/socioeconomic responses6.30-7.00 walk to reception7.00-8.30 AAMAS reception, Sorbonne “Cordeliers”8.30-10.30 Dinner Le Procope, 13 rue de l'Ancienne Comédie
Meeting Schedule
Verification/validation Designing reward/utility functions
Iterated design/simulation/verification Inductive specification from examples Ensuring compliance
Theory of agents Subsumption, composition, distribution, cooperation,
transparency, etc. Theory of non-agents
Pure question-answering systems Meta-non-agents
Bootstrapping methods Superintelligent self-verification Superintelligent boxing If you were me what utility function would you give yourself?
Technical research agenda
One international, professional society Keep tabs on worldwide effort levels etc. Promulgate culture of responsibility,
safety Develop standards for risk
analysis/verification Keep decision makers and society well
informedLobby for research fundingLegal standards for liability etc.Conferences, conference tracks, journals
Organizational/socioeconomic responses