Open-sourcing DeepMind Lab
deepmind.com
deepmind.com
>> "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 Quarter."
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.
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".
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.
If you take a pre-trained convnet (which, by analogy is like a person who has had 'life experience' of looking at objects), and extract activations for unseen object categories, in many cases you CAN one-shot-learn these new object categories. Try feeding them into a SVM or use L2 distance between test images and the one-shot exemplar image.
On top of this, there's a lot of work on memory-augmented nets and meta-learning for learning new categories on the fly.
For example, with bears -- I personally know of black bears and polar bears. I can be a little more detailed with fish but with dogs there are dozens of "different" [easily recognizable] types within the same category of "dog".
Of course, the disparity between deep neural nets and human brains remains unknown. A human learns the difference between a cat and a dog, while at the same time, learns so many different things, yet a neural net only learns the difference between a cat and a dog. We don't know how much we don't know.
DeepMind Lab is built on top of id software’s Quake III Arena (id software, 1999) engine using the ioquake3 (Nussel et al., 2016) version of the codebase, which is actively maintained by enthusiasts in the open source community. DeepMind Lab also includes tools from q3map2 (GtkRadiant, 2016) and bspc (bspc, 2016) for level generation. The bot scripts are based on code from the OpenArena (OpenArena, 2016) project.
At least, that's my non-expert understanding.
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 trickiest part is to determine what rewards make an optimization algorithm "human". How rewards weight and interact amongst themselves is where the mistery is, isn't it? So why isn't this part of the research program? Any deepminder wants to weight in on this?
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.
Do you want to recommend reading regarding the state of the art? Technical papers Ok.
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.
The other is free and open, but governed by a corporation, with a single software option and no partnerships.