Man-machine co-operation trumping supercomputers

You may know the old joke about the supercomputer that was fed the question “what is the meaning of life”, and that came up – after long calculations – with the answer “27”. This joke has been told to illustrate many different points about computers, human computer interaction, philosophy, and life in general. Here, I would like to draw your attention to fuzzy questions and precise answers, or vice versa, and to better ways of interacting with computers.

Shyam Sankar gave an interesting talk on the subject at TED, called “The rise of human-computer cooperation”, where he “explains why solving big problems (like catching terrorists or identifying hidden trends) is not a question of finding the right algorithm, but rather the right symbiotic relationship between computation and human creativity”.

His first example is well known but deserves to be retold. It is the story of 2 world-class chess championships: World champion Gary Kasparov losing against IBM’s “Deep Blue” computer in 1997. In 2005, in a free-style chess tournament, in which men and machines could participate as partners, a supercomputer was beaten by a grand master with a relatively week laptop. But to everyone’s surprise, the tournament was not won by a grandmaster with a supercomputer, but by two amateurs using three relatively week laptops. Sankar argues that the way of interacting with their machines helped average men with average machines beat the best men with the best machines.

Now what has that got to do with Search or Unified Information Access?

Well, it may be a long shot and maybe I am not putting it into the most convincing sentences, but perhaps someone can help me by adding their symbiotic brain-and-computer power to my argument.

In “classic” computing, using databases, data warehouses, BI systems, etc., the (super) computer is asked precise questions – by people who understand the structure of their data and the way to ask these precise questions – and the computer comes up with an answer like “27” or a nice dashboard illustrating figures and possibly even trends. If you want to ask a question that takes you outside the structure of the data or the predefined logic of the “decision support” programs, you are out of luck.

Search, on the other hand, allows you to ask fuzzy questions in natural language and it comes up not with a “27”-type answer, but with a set of answers – be they documents or data base records – ordered in categories for you to navigate in. (Categories aggregate information from multiple sources, including business applications.) You can zoom-in on what your human intelligence recognizes as the most promising subcategory. It is easy to refine your question after insight from the first set of answers, indeed to ask any question you like without any need for reprogramming. And in a man-machine Ping-Pong of three exchanges, you have a good chance to discover an answer that your supercomputer with its elaborate programs would not have come up with. Or maybe it would – but with a few thousand man-days of development and “tuning”, and millions spent on top-notch hardware – just like Watson won  Jeopardy.

At Sinequa, we like to think that our software is above average, but even if you assume it to be just average, the interaction of users with our Search and Unified Information Access platform is rather like that of the two amateurs with their laptops who beat the chess champion with his supercomputer.

+1Share on LinkedInShare on Twitter

4 thoughts on “Man-machine co-operation trumping supercomputers

  1. Two amateurs using three relatively week laptops winning a chess tournament against a grandmaster with a supercomputer! What does that mean for Search and me in my work environment? Am I going to beat the BI guys with their big machines and Data Warehouses by finding relevant information faster with my Sinequa Search solution running on a few commoditized servers? I guess, they will beat me in some specific fields and I will beat them across the board. The good news for the big shots in BI: the company will probably need both our skill sets – for now.

  2. There is a whole new IT-field emerging: “The symbiotic relationship between computation and human creativity” or “Creative Human Computer Interaction” for short. For those who think that this is just about the new clothes of the naked emperor called “Man-machine interface”, beware: This not about pretty screens with buttons and bars, it is about organizing content in meaningful categories – and to be able to do so on the fly – and then to react to human directions, possibly expressed in “fuzzy language” in an intelligent way. We are a long way from old-style “Human Interfaces” and from banal keyword search. At Sinequa we work on simpler and faster Man-Machine Ping-Pong.

  3. How far away are we still from this new world of “symbiotic relationships between computation and human creativity”? Do companies realize what this means for their information management and even their organization and operations? Do they realize the need to unify information access to make it simpler and faster?

  4. As usual, the ideal world is not quite here yet, but companies begin to realize the paradigm shift that is within their reach today, and a growing number is becoming aware of the enormous ROI that they can achieve as long as pricing for Search and Unified Information Access platforms is not yet linked to customer ROI. At Sinequa we see a tenfold increase in project sizes, probably fueled by a 100 or even a 1000-fold increase in ROI. Unfortunately for us and fortunately for our clients, our prices have not been multiplied by any of these factors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current month ye@r day *