11–20 of 23 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not if you can't even tell the AI what you're looking for. We're a long way from "Computer, is there anything interesting about this data?"
Unsupervised learning is a thing. It could tell us "these data points are similar", we just still need a human to try and quantify why it thinks they are similar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unsupervised learning is a thing. It could tell us "these data points are similar", we just still need a human to try and quantify why it thinks they are similar.
What if they open source the data sets to Google or Microsoft to figure it out?
AI isn't just some magic that "figures out" anything and everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if they open source the data sets to Google or Microsoft to figure it out?
Figure what out, exactly? AI isn't just some magic that "figures out" anything and everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if they open source the data sets to Google or Microsoft to figure it out?
Figure what out, exactly? AI isn't just some magic that "figures out" anything and everything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Figure what out, exactly? AI isn't just some magic that "figures out" anything and everything.
Machine learning does allow you to find patterns in data. Some of these models are getting very good with image recognition.
In your link, you neglected the part where NASA first had to learn what rocks made good samples before they could "teach" their AI to look for similarly interesting samples.
In this case, you have a lot of data strewn about many different mediums (some now obsolete). Yes there's images, but what would the AI look for? In the other data collected, what would it analyze... what would be the goal for it to achieve? This is why we still have human scientists... and yes, AI can help, but it cannot replace.
As another HN'er said, we're a long way away from "AI, discover new science!".
Do we have before/after evidence that at one point it didn't exist, and then around 500 years ago it existed?
Here's one thing that has bugged me for a while. Why is it said that the great red spot is around 500 years old? How do we know that it hasn't been around for much longer? Do we have before/after evidence that at one point it didn't exist, and then around 500 years ago it existed?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Machine learning does allow you to find patterns in data. Some of these models are getting very good with image recognition.
It seems you have a lot of faith in AI, but don't seem to really grasp what AI is/does/can do. In your link, you neglected the part where NASA first had to learn what rocks made good samples before they could "teach" their AI to look for similarly interesting samples. In this case, you have a lot of data strewn about many different mediums (some now obsolete). Yes there's images, but what would the AI look for? In th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems you have a lot of faith in AI, but don't seem to really grasp what AI is/does/can do. In your link, you neglected the part where NASA first had to learn what rocks made good samples before they could "teach" their AI to look for similarly interesting samples. In this case, you have a lot of data strewn about many different mediums (some now obsolete). Yes there's images, but what would the AI look for? In th…
I am a Data Scientist with Master's in Neural Networks so I do understand the challenges in preparing data for modeling. I am merely suggesting the option of exploring the problem of finding patterns in data through ML techniques. This does not take away the work involved in preparing clean data sets for training. Here are some Astronomers who are doing this kind of work. https://www.wired.com/2017/03/astronomers-dep…
It's not the nature of the data that poses an issue... it's the lack of direction. AI/ML/NN (whatever buzz word of choice) simply cannot do the things you seem to believe it capable of.
> it does not hurt getting some help from companies that are searching for problems to solve.
What makes you think Google or Microsoft have any interest in working on NASA's research? These are very, very different domains.
Even if they were interested, what problems would they be solving exactly? This is the lack of direction that is the core problem with you assertion AI/ML/NN would be of any help here on it's own.