News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Keep your AI claims in check by pretendgeneer on Monday February 27, 2023 @06:36PM (#34963622)
If the system your building is "mathematically impossible" to explain in a way that would be expected of every other system. Maybe you shouldn't be building that system.
Re:Keep your AI claims in check by foxes on Monday February 27, 2023 @06:45PM (#34963711)
Mathematical explanation is not required in many areas.

Perhaps you can’t perfectly explain it but you can at least understand it statistically.

For example is not currently possible to mathematically explain people’s behaviour, but there is statistical evidence and also accountability on an individual. Eg a doctor making a decision about a scan result.

Re:Keep your AI claims in check by witnesser2 on Monday February 27, 2023 @07:01PM (#34963874)
I raise another example, to question, you can statistically solve the famous diffusion problem.
Re:Keep your AI claims in check by jrumbut on Monday February 27, 2023 @08:17PM (#34964475)
It's even simpler than that. You don't need any particular level of understanding, you just can't lie about what your level of understanding is.

The following would seem to be OK: "This model performs well in a set of tests we devised, your mileage may vary."

Re:Keep your AI claims in check by mr_toad on Monday February 27, 2023 @06:46PM (#34963726)
Non-linear models often perform better. You’re never going to approach anything like GPT with a linear model.
Re:Keep your AI claims in check by rcme on Monday February 27, 2023 @07:27PM (#34964105)
Theoretically you could use a polynomial model which, while not linear, is pretty high on the explainability scale.
Re:Keep your AI claims in check by witnesser2 on Monday February 27, 2023 @06:56PM (#34963833)
I don't think mentioning non-linearality means you can bypass the singularities you may cause typically CUSP, buckling etc and omit the analysis intentionally or negeliccantly.