Live data from Hacker News

Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab

deepmind.com

11–20 of 35 posts

Re: Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab

#11

> There are two parts to this research program: (1) designing ever-more intelligent agents capable of more-and-more sophisticated cognitive skills, and (2) building increasingly complex environments where agents can be trained and evaluated. I find this puzzling. If your goal were to create an human-like AI (which I always assume is at least partly implicit in these ambitious projects), it seems to me that the tricki…

There are plenty of domains where the objective is quite well defined. Video games are excellent examples. An agent that achieved superhuman performance on, say, Starcraft, would have a very impressive suite of capabilities involving some significant advances from the current state of the art. As such these tasks are great drivers of research.

But you're absolutely right that humans don't optimize any 'simple' reward function, and achieving human-like behavior in real-world domains will likely require learning reward functions. There are a few people starting to think about this, e.g. this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.03137 (disclaimer: work from my research group though I'm not involved) proposing a framework by which a robot can learn a human's (implicit, complex) values through interaction. This is also related to concerns over AI safety, since naive reward-optimizing agents are (like drug addicts) willing to do arbitrarily bad things in service of maximizing their prescribed "reward", while agents that maintain uncertainty over reward functions are willing to ask for guidance when confused or unsure. However this line of research is much more preliminary and academic -- there are probably people at DeepMind thinking along these lines, but certainly their focus is more on directions that will produce new breakthroughs and practical capabilities within forseeable timeframes.

Re: Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab

#12
post #9

> There are two parts to this research program: (1) designing ever-more intelligent agents capable of more-and-more sophisticated cognitive skills, and (2) building increasingly complex environments where agents can be trained and evaluated. I find this puzzling. If your goal were to create an human-like AI (which I always assume is at least partly implicit in these ambitious projects), it seems to me that the tricki…

which I always assume is at least partly implicit in these ambitious projects No serious researcher is even contemplating that problem yet, except as a thought experiment. These projects are more about working out how to work out what questions to ask to direct research which might lead to more generalised AI.

Alright thanks.

Do you want to recommend reading regarding the state of the art? Technical papers Ok.

Re: Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab

#15
Looks like OpenAI set some standards. E.g. OpenAI Gym that encourage others like DeepMind to open-soure more training sets.

Also gaming seems to be driving a lot of innovation. In 1990s games drove CPU/GPU advances, while now they seems to be perfect training for future AI deep-learning algorithms.

Re: Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab

#16
post #2

This sounds ambitious. I wonder if they can also address the following problem. Currently, deep learning toolkits need thousands of training images to classify images of, e.g., dogs and cats. A human, in contrast, could learn the difference between a dog and a cat by looking just at a single example (or perhaps a few). So right now, deep learning is too much "simple" pattern matching, and too little real "AI".

Keep in mind that it literally takes human beings years before they can perform basic intelligence tasks. I do agree that AI right now is too focused on pattern matching from large data sets, but Deepmind has definitely been exploring other ways to think about memory or attention in artificial neural networks, and they tend to be more biologically inspired.

Re: Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab

#17

In case it's not obvious, DeepMind is Google: >> "DeepMind was founded in London in 2010 and backed by some of the most successful technology entrepreneurs in the world. Having been acquired by Google in 2014, we are now part of the Alphabet group. We continue to be based in our hometown of London, alongside some of the country's leading academic, cultural and scientific organisations in the King's Cross Knowledge Qu…

When they say that they're based in the King's Cross Knowledge Quarter what they mean is that they will share the Google's office which don't exist yet.

Re: Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab

#18

In case it's not obvious, DeepMind is Google: >> "DeepMind was founded in London in 2010 and backed by some of the most successful technology entrepreneurs in the world. Having been acquired by Google in 2014, we are now part of the Alphabet group. We continue to be based in our hometown of London, alongside some of the country's leading academic, cultural and scientific organisations in the King's Cross Knowledge Qu…

When they say that they're based in the King's Cross Knowledge Quarter what they mean is that they will share the Google's office which don't exist yet.

I think I will never understand the sort of mindset where you just say things regardless of whether you know them to be true.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Google+UK/@51.5246616,-0.1...

Re: Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab

#19
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When they say that they're based in the King's Cross Knowledge Quarter what they mean is that they will share the Google's office which don't exist yet.

I think I will never understand the sort of mindset where you just say things regardless of whether you know them to be true. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Google+UK/@51.5246616,-0.1...

Have you ever said something which you didn't know was true? What was your mindset then?

Come on, I'll wait.

Re: Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab

#20
post #6
post #2

This sounds ambitious. I wonder if they can also address the following problem. Currently, deep learning toolkits need thousands of training images to classify images of, e.g., dogs and cats. A human, in contrast, could learn the difference between a dog and a cat by looking just at a single example (or perhaps a few). So right now, deep learning is too much "simple" pattern matching, and too little real "AI".

One shot learning is such an active area of research there's a long Wikipedia page[1] about it. I think the SOTA is probably [2], which came out of DeepMind. There's still a way to go before it matches ResNet performance on ImageNet (or even human performance on any real task) though. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-shot_learning [2] https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.06065

Also:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.04080

Post reply on HN