Artificial Intelligence Still Cannot Compute Cause & Effect

Must read article to understand AI in simple language. Today’s AI and machine learning is dependent on probabilistic correlations and not cause and effect learning. But “Correlations can often lead to insufficient or inaccurate conclusions. This point was clearly illustrated by an observational study on women’s health conducted in the 1990’s that concluded that Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) had a beneficial effect in mitigating heart disease. The same statistical view of the data also revealed a protective effect of HRT on homicide rates. When experts re-analyzed the data and adjusted for important confounding factors, they found that HRT actually had an adverse effect on heart disease and no effect on the homicide rate.”.

Three decades ago, a prime challenge in artificial-intelligence research was to program machines to associate a potential cause to a set of observable conditions. Pearl figured out how to do that using a scheme called Bayesian networks. Bayesian networks made it practical for machines to say that, given a patient who returned from Africa with a fever and body aches, the most likely explanation was malaria. In 2011 Pearl won the Turing Award, computer science’s highest honor, in large part for this work.

But as Pearl sees it, the field of AI got mired in probabilistic associations. These days, headlines tout the latest breakthroughs in machine learning and neural networks. We read about computers that can master ancient games and drive cars. Pearl is underwhelmed. As he sees it, the state of the art in artificial intelligence today is merely a souped-up version of what machines could already do a generation ago: find hidden regularities in a large set of data. “All the impressive achievements of deep learning amount to just curve fitting,” he said recently.

In his new book, Pearl, now 81, elaborates a vision for how truly intelligent machines would think. The key, he argues, is to replace reasoning by association with causal reasoning. Instead of the mere ability to correlate fever and malaria, machines need the capacity to reason that malaria causes fever. Once this kind of causal framework is in place, it becomes possible for machines to ask counterfactual questions—to inquire how the causal relationships would change given some kind of intervention—which Pearl views as the cornerstone of scientific thought. Pearl also proposes a formal language in which to make this kind of thinking possible—a 21st-century version of the Bayesian framework that allowed machines to think probabilistically.

Pearl expects that causal reasoning could provide machines with human-level intelligence. They’d be able to communicate with humans more effectively and even, he explains, achieve status as moral entities with a capacity for free will—and for evil. Quanta Magazine sat down with Pearl at a recent conference in San Diego and later held a follow-up interview with him by phone. An edited and condensed version of those conversations follows.

Full Article

posted by f.sheikh

Is the Virus on My Clothes? My Shoes? My Hair? My Newspaper?

We asked the experts to answer questions about all the places coronavirus lurks (or doesn’t). You’ll feel better after reading this.

When we asked readers to send their questions about coronavirus, a common theme emerged: Many people are fearful about tracking the virus into their homes on their clothes, their shoes, the mail and even the newspaper.

We reached out to infectious disease experts, aerosol scientists and microbiologists to answer reader questions about the risks of coming into contact with the virus during essential trips outside and from deliveries. While we still need to take precautions, their answers were reassuring.

For most of us who are practicing social distancing and making only occasional trips to the grocery store or pharmacy, experts agree that it’s not necessary to change clothes or take a shower when you return home. You should, however, always wash your hands. While it’s true that a sneeze or cough from an infected person can propel viral droplets and smaller particles through the air, most of them will drop to the ground.

Studies show that some small viral particles could float in the air for about half an hour, but they don’t swarm like gnats and are unlikely to collide with your clothes. “A droplet that is small enough to float in air for a while also is unlikely to deposit on clothing because of aerodynamics,” said Linsey Marr, an aerosol scientist at Virginia Tech. “The droplets are small enough that they’ll move in the air around your body and clothing.”

Full Article

The Nobel-Winning Economist Who Wants You to Read More Fiction

“I would encourage anyone interested in understanding the Great Depression or mid-19th century Britain to turn to Steinbeck or Dickens,” says Joseph E. Stiglitz, whose book “People, Power, and Profits” will be out in paperback soon.

What books are on your nightstand?

Like everyone, I have a large and aspirational pile on my nightstand. In fact, my wife recently bought me a bigger nightstand so we’d have more room for the books I want to read. Right now I’ve got “A Moveable Feast,” by Ernest Hemingway, to remind me of Paris, which I fell even more in love with during my term teaching there. “The Ratline,” because the author, Philippe Sands, is married to my wife’s sister and he sent it to us. Jill Lepore’s “These Truths” and “The Light That Failed,” by Ivan Krastev and Stephen Holmes, because everywhere I go people are talking about those two books. Ian McEwan’s “The Cockroach,” because the person who runs the renowned bookstore in Schloss Elmau (Germany) thought I would like this Kafkaesque parable of Brexit, in which a cockroach becomes prime minister. A book that was on my nightstand, but I have since read, is Hannah Lillith Assadi’s beautiful “Sonora,” a novel about the Arizona desert, New York City and the coming-of-age of a young woman whose parents are Palestinian and Israeli Jewish.

What’s the last great book you read?

“The In-Between World of Vikram Lall,” by M. G. Vassanji, in which a corrupt official now in hiding in Canada looks back on his life and the independence movement in Kenya. Particularly unforgettable are his memories of young love and the student movement in Dar es Salaam. The book was especially meaningful to me because of the time I spent working in Kenya between 1969 and 1971.

Are there any classic novels that you only recently read for the first time?

Inspired by Carl Miller’s rock opera about the lives of the Brontës, I read “Wuthering Heights.” What a book about inequality, sexuality, class. Beautifully atmospheric, too.

posted by f.sheikh

Full Story

Some Assembly Required

Some Assembly Required’ Review: How Nature Finds a Way Did a virus help humans develop the ability to read, write and remember? Animals that fly evolved wings independently, but due to the physics of matter wings always share a similar form. PHOTO: PASCAL GOETGHELUCK/SCIENCE SOURCE By Daniel J. Levitin March 27, 2020 6:08 pm ET SAVE PRINT TEXT 9 If you’re over about 20 and learned about evolution in your high-school biology class, it’s likely that there were a number of things that didn’t seem to add up, and that you were exhorted to just take on faith. Random mutations occur, and across millions of births, the story goes, every once in a while an individual ends up with a mutation that confers a benefit for reproduction, or at least for living long enough to reproduce. The classic example is white-bodied moths (Biston betularia) on the trunk of a tree with white bark—they blend in and so are more difficult for predators to pick off. After the industrial revolution in the U.K. turned many of the white-barked trees black with soot, some moths that had randomly become black were better camouflaged; soon they were the only ones left to reproduce, and all U.K. moths became black-bodied. As science, evolution is not like a chemistry experiment, where you can mix baking soda and vinegar and see an instant reaction, or a physics experiment where you slam one pool ball into another. Like relativity theory, evolution can only really be understood through thought experiments. But those don’t work so well for larger-scale changes. Why don’t we see more “intermediate” species, such as fish with legs or short-necked giraffes? How could anything as complicated as eyes have developed through evolution? They are an intricate mechanism that requires a lot of different parts working harmoniously together, and in isolation the development of only a few of these parts would be pointless. Many a high-school and college student is left to throw questions like this onto the pile with other unanswerables, such as what there was before the universe formed, or whether cannibals avoid eating clowns because they taste funny. SOME ASSEMBLY REQUIRED By Neil Shubin Pantheon, 267 pages, $26.95 In “Some Assembly Required,” as well as his previous popular-science masterpiece “Your Inner Fish,” the biologist Neil Shubin shows himself to be a natural storyteller and a gifted scientific communicator. This new work catches us up on the latest progress in understanding such complicated cases—and there has been a lot of it, some providing the kind of hard, tangible evidence that many scientists once thought would be impossible to find without a time machine. But a time machine is effectively what Mr. Shubin and his colleagues at the University of Chicago and elsewhere have found by studying fossils, and by studying the natural variation that occurs in contemporary species such as salamanders. The author points out the very logical notion that not every mutation is equally as likely to occur. There are constraints—in the structure and materials of bones, cartilage and joints, for example. Consider flight—many creatures fly, but the feat takes similar form across bats, “flying” squirrels, birds and insects because flight requires a great surface area in order to bring the organism aloft. Yet wings are made out of a variety of things—webbing between fingers and toes, feathers and the translucent polysaccharide of insect wings. Animals that fly arrive at wings independently, but once they do, the physics of the matter dictates that wings will share a similar form. What about that missing link, the short-necked giraffe? Mr. Shubin describes something even more spectacular: independent evolution of radically different forms of an organism that have been geographically separated. Various Caribbean islands have similar lizards on them. Forest lizards come in three types, with specialized adaptations for living in the canopy of a tree, on the trunk or near the ground. You might expect that the canopy-living lizards, with their big, deep green heads (the color of foliage), would be most closely related to other canopy-living lizards across the islands. But they’re not. Rather, the lizards on each island “are most closely related to others on their own island.” What began as a single type of lizard on a given island became, over time, three types—on each island, they adapted independently, with evolution producing the same result over and over again. Something similar took place with mammals. Marsupials—those pouch mammals that include the kangaroo, wallaby, koala and, here, the Virginia opossum—include diverse species that mimic the forms of nonmarsupial mammals, another instance of evolution independently coming up with the same result. “There is a marsupial flying squirrel, a marsupial mole, a marsupial ground cat and even a marsupial groundhog. And those are just the ones that are alive today—marsupial lions, wolves, and even saber-toothed cats” once roamed Australia. These findings show us that the diversity of life as we know it is not the one-in-a-million shot of contingencies being just so. The forms that organisms take are constrained by the ways “genes and development build bodies, by the physical constraints of environments.” There is a certain poetry to Mr. Shubin’s account, as when he explains that “the genetic architecture that builds the bodies of flies, mice, and people reveals that we are all variations on a theme. From a common toolkit come the many branches of the tree of life.” You might say it’s in-gene-ious. With so much in the news about coronavirus, we could all do with a better understanding of what viruses are and how they work. Mr. Shubin provides: “Viruses . . . have genomes stripped of everything but the machinery needed for infection and reproduction. They invade cells, enter the nucleus, and invade the genome itself. Once in the DNA, they take over and use the host’s genome to make copies of themselves . . . with this infection, a single host cell becomes a factory to make millions of viruses.” Viruses are not “designed” to be destructive; indeed, if they are too infectious, the host will die and so will the viruses. And of course, not all viruses are bad; some are beneficial. So here’s where the story gets really wild. Scientists discovered a gene called Arc (Activity-regulated cytoskeleton-associated protein) that is activated every time you learn something; flaws in this gene have since been implicated in amnesia and Alzheimer’s disease. All land-living animals have the Arc gene, due to a virus (a relative of HIV, by the way) that invaded the genome of our common ancestor, about 375 million years ago. Once the virus entered a host, it brought with it the ability to make a protein that enhanced neuroplasticity and memories. Traits can appear in one species, only to be borrowed, stolen and modified by another through viral infections. “Our ability to read, write, and remember the moments of our lives,” Mr. Shubin writes, “is due to an ancient viral infection that happened when fish took their first steps on land.” Viral infection, and later domestication of the virus, is now understood to be a source of these “independent inventions,” such as the weird coincidence that written language appeared more or less simultaneously all around the globe. If you’re reading this while sheltering in place during the coronavirus pandemic, thank a different, benevolent virus for giving you the ability to read. And to remember that favorite song you want to play next time you’re feeling down. —Mr. Levitin’s latest book is “Successful Aging: A Neuroscientist Explores the Power and Potential of Our Lives.”