Artificial intelligence (AI) programs are designed to learn by trial and error. It may take a while, but when an AI program makes a mistake, it will try to avoid making that same mistake in the future. However, if the task it is attempting to learn is driving a car, learning by trial and error could be deadly, as well as costly. Yet humans, by and large, don’t have as much of a problem with accidents while learning to drive. What’s the difference? Humans have emotions, while machines don’t, and humans use their emotions in ways that can provide shortcuts in getting to a learning objective. In the case of driving, the emotion of fear turns out to be very useful. Fear induces physiological responses (sweaty palms, dry mouth, rapid heart rate) to signal that we have to be careful in order to stay alive.
AI researchers wondered if AI programs might learn faster to drive safely (on a driving simulator) if there was some analog input to fear in its program. First, researchers measured physiological responses of four humans while driving a course on the simulator, allowing the researchers to gauge their level of fear in particular situations. The average response was then used as an input to the AI program, which would signal to the AI when it would be better to behave in a less risky manner to avoid a crash. To quote the article, “AIs using this method still had to crash to learn safe driving skills, but they required 25% fewer crashes to reach the same level of performance as a nonfearful AI, the researchers reported this week at the International Conference on Learning Representations here.” I wouldn’t use “25% fewer crashes!” as a promotional phrase, but it’s a significant improvement.
The researchers wondered if they would get a similar response if they just made the AI pay closer attention to small distances between its vehicle and other objects it might run into (walls, other cars, etc). The outcome was nowhere near as good as fear.
So maybe if we teach our AIs how to fear, they’ll be much nicer when they become our overlords?
On to the comments, below the fold. But first, a word from our sponsor:
Here at Top Comments we strive to nourish community by rounding up some of the site's best, funniest, most mojo'd & most informative commentary, and we depend on your help!! If you see a comment by another Kossack that deserves wider recognition, please send it either to topcomments at gmail or to the Top Comments group mailbox by 9:30pm Eastern. Please please please include a few words about why you sent it in as well as your user name (even if you think we know it already :-)), so we can credit you with the find!
Top Comments (May 15, 2019):
From ScottyUrb:
MetroGnome's setup and KingSweden's reply both made me laugh! From last night’s Elections Live Digest.
Highlighted by Paul A:
In Walter Einenkel's front page post, I would nominate SGMRET's comment which gives insight into people in military service. Also, in the same diary, bobstandard's comment is notable for his stating that "There are no 'accidents' when it comes to guns, only failures. If a kid gets his hand on a gun, it's because someone
failed in their responsibility to keep the weapon safe and used
appropriately."
Top Mojo (May 14, 2019):
Top Mojo is courtesy of mik! Click here for more on how Top Mojo works.
Top Photos (May 14, 2019):