Explainable AI systems aim to make decisions that are easily understood by humans—a laudable goal, but what makes a good explanation?
Testing the best: There’s only one way to figure that out: ask some users. So that’s what researchers from Harvard and Google Brain did, in a series of studies. Test subjects looked at different combinations of inputs, outputs, and explanations for a machine-learning algorithm that was designed to learn the dietary habits or medical conditions of an alien (yes, seriously—alien life was chosen to keep the test subject’s own biases from creeping in). Users then scored the different combinations.
Keep it short: Longer explanations were found to be more difficult to parse than shorter ones—though breaking up the same amount of text into many short lines was somehow better than making people read a few longer lines. As you can tell, the tests examined some pretty basic elements of how to deliver information—but at least it’s a start.
Geoffrey Hinton tells us why he’s now scared of the tech he helped build
“I have suddenly switched my views on whether these things are going to be more intelligent than us.”
ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it
The narrative around cheating students doesn’t tell the whole story. Meet the teachers who think generative AI could actually make learning better.
Deep learning pioneer Geoffrey Hinton has quit Google
Hinton will be speaking at EmTech Digital on Wednesday.
We are hurtling toward a glitchy, spammy, scammy, AI-powered internet
Large language models are full of security vulnerabilities, yet they’re being embedded into tech products on a vast scale.
Get the latest updates from
MIT Technology Review
Discover special offers, top stories, upcoming events, and more.