As you drive to work, your car continually adjusts fuel injection and exhaust recirculation to get the best gas mileage. You use Inrix, a traffic prediction system, to shorten your rush-hour commute, not to mention lowering your stress level. At work, machine learning helps you combat information overload. You use a data cube to summarize masses of data, look at it from every angle, and drill down on the most important bits. You have a decision to make: Will layout A or B bring more business to your website? A web-learning system tries both out and reports back. You need to check out a potential supplierвЂ™s website, but itвЂ™s in a foreign language. No problem: Google automatically translates it for you. Your e-mail conveniently sorts itself into folders, leaving only the most important messages in the inbox. Your word processor checks your grammar and spelling. You find a flight for an upcoming trip, but hold off on buying the ticket because Bing Travel predicts its price will go down soon. Without realizing it, you accomplish a lot more, hour by hour, than you would without the help of machine learning.. We live in the age of algorithms. Only a generation or two ago, mentioning the wordalgorithm would have drawn a blank from most people. Today, algorithms are in every nook and cranny of civilization. They are woven into the fabric of everyday life. TheyвЂ™re not just in your cell phone or your laptop but in your car, your house, your appliances, and your toys. Your bank is a gigantic tangle of algorithms, with humans turning the knobs here and there. Algorithms schedule flights and then fly the airplanes. Algorithms run factories, trade and routegoods, cash the proceeds, and keep records. If every algorithm suddenly stopped working, it would be the end of the world as we know it.. Because the potential impact is so great, it would behoove us to try to invent the Master Algorithm even if the odds of success were low. And even if it takes a long time, searching for a universal learner has many immediate benefits. One is the better understanding of machine learning that a unified view enables. Too many business decisions are made with scant understanding of the analytics underpinning them, but it doesnвЂ™t have to be that way. To use a technology, we donвЂ™t need to master its inner workings, but we do need to have a good conceptual model of it. We need to know how to find a station on the radio, or change the volume. Today, those of us who arenвЂ™t machine-learning experts have no conceptual model of what a learner does. The algorithms we drive when we use Google, Facebook, or the latest analytics suite are a bit like a black limo with tinted windows that mysteriously shows up at our door one night: Should we get in? Where will it take us? ItвЂ™s time to get in the driverвЂ™s seat. Knowing the assumptions that different learners make will help us pick the right one for the job, instead of going with a random one that fell into our lap-and then suffering with it for years, painfully rediscovering what we should have known from the start. By knowing what learners optimize, we can make certain they optimize what we care about, rather than what came in the box. Perhaps most important, once we know how a particular learner arrives at its conclusions, weвЂ™ll know what to make of that information-what to believe, what to return to the manufacturer, and how to get a better result next time around. And with the universal learner weвЂ™ll develop in this book as the conceptual model, we can do all this without cognitive overload. Machine learning is simple at heart; we just need to peel away the layers of math and jargon to reveal the innermost Russian doll.. If your credit card was used twice after 11:00 p.m. on a weekday, it was stolen.. The symbolists. The optimal weight, where the error is lowest, is 2.0. If the network starts out with a weight of 0.75, for example, backprop will get to the optimum in a few steps, like a ball rolling downhill. But if it starts at 5.5, on the other hand, backprop will roll down to 7.0 and remain stuck there. Backprop, with its incremental weight changes, doesnвЂ™t know how to find the global error minimum, and local ones can be arbitrarily bad, like mistaking your grandmother for a hat. With one weight, you could try every possible value at increments of 0.01 and find the optimum that way. But with thousands of weights, let alone millions or billions, this is not an option because the number of points on the grid goes up exponentially with the number of weights. The global minimum is hidden somewhere in the unfathomable vastness of hyperspace-and good luck finding it.. The exploration-exploitation dilemma. CHAPTER SEVEN: You Are What You Resemble. You donвЂ™t need explicit ratings to do collaborative filtering, by the way. If Ken ordered a movie on Netflix, that means he expects to like it. So the вЂњratingsвЂќ can just be ordered/not ordered, and two users are similar if theyвЂ™ve ordered a lot of the same movies. Even just clicking on something implicitly shows interest in it. Nearest-neighbor works with all of the above. These days all kinds of algorithms are used to recommend items to users, but weightedk-nearest-neighbor was the first widely used one, and itвЂ™s still hard to beat.. It gets even worse. Nearest-neighbor is based on finding similar objects, and in high dimensions, the notion of similarity itself breaks down. Hyperspace is like the Twilight Zone. The intuitions we have from living in three dimensions no longer apply, and weird and weirder things start to happen. Consider an orange: a tasty ball of pulp surrounded by a thin shell of skin. LetвЂ™s say 90 percent of the radius of an orange is occupied by pulp, and the remaining 10 percent by skin. That means 73 percent of the volume of the orange is pulp (0.93). Now consider a hyperorange: still with 90 percent of the radius occupied by pulp, but in a hundred dimensions, say. The pulp has shrunk to only about three thousandths of a percent of the hyperorangeвЂ™s volume (0.9100). The hyperorange is all skin, and youвЂ™ll never be done peeling it!. Arguably even higher up in the skills ladder is music composition. David Cope, an emeritus professor of music at the University of California, Santa Cruz, designed an algorithm that creates new music in the style of famous composers by selecting and recombining short passages from their work. At a conference I attended some years ago, he played threeвЂњMozartвЂќ pieces: one by the real Mozart, one by a human composer imitating Mozart, and one by his system. He then asked the audience to vote for the authentic Amadeus. Wolfgang won, but the computer beat the human imitator. This being an AI conference, the audience was delighted. Audiences at other events were less happy. One listener angrily accused Cope of ruining music for him. If Cope is right, creativity-the ultimate unfathomable-boils down to analogy and recombination. Judge for yourself by googlingвЂњdavid cope mp3.вЂќ. ConnectionistsвЂ™ models are inspired by the brain, with networks of S curves that correspond to neurons and weighted connections between them corresponding to synapses. In Alchemy, two variables are connected if they appear together in some formula, and the probability of a variable given its neighbors is an S curve. (Although I wonвЂ™t show why, itвЂ™s a direct consequence of the master equation we saw in the previous section.) The connectionistsвЂ™ master algorithm is backpropagation, which they use to figure out which neurons are responsible for which errors and adjust their weights accordingly. Backpropagation is a form of gradient descent, which Alchemy uses to optimize the weights of a Markov logic network.. Computational complexity is one thing, but human complexity is another. If computers are like idiot savants, learning algorithms can sometimes come across like child prodigies prone to temper tantrums. ThatвЂ™s one reason humans who can wrangle them into submission are so highly paid. If you know how to expertly tweak the control knobs until theyвЂ™re just right, magic can ensue, in the form of a stream of insights beyond the learnerвЂ™s years. And, not unlike the Delphic oracle, interpreting the learnerвЂ™s pronouncements can itself require considerable skill. Turn the knobs wrong, though, and the learner may spew out a torrent of gibberish or clam up in defiance. Unfortunately, in this regard Alchemy is no better than most. Writing down what you know in logic, feeding in the data, and pushingthe button is the fun part. When Alchemy returns a beautifully accurate and efficient MLN, you go down to the pub and celebrate. When it doesnвЂ™t-which is most of the time-the battle begins. Is the problem in the knowledge, the learning, or the inference? On the one hand, because of the learning and probabilistic inference, a simple MLN can do the job of a complex program. On the other, when it doesnвЂ™t work, itвЂ™s much harder to debug. The solution is to make it more interactive, able to introspect and explain its reasoning. That will take us another step closer to the Master Algorithm.. How much of your brain does your job use? The more it does, the safer you are. In the early days of AI, the common view was that computers would replace blue-collar workers before white-collar ones, because white-collar work requires more brains. But thatвЂ™s not quite how things turned out. Robots assemble cars, but they havenвЂ™t replaced construction workers. On the other hand, machine-learning algorithms have replaced credit analysts and direct marketers. As it turns out, evaluating credit applications is easier for machines than walking arounda construction site without tripping, even though for humans itвЂ™s the other way around. The common theme is that narrowly defined tasks are easily learned from data, but tasks that require a broad combination of skills and knowledge arenвЂ™t. Most of your brain is devoted to vision and motion, which is a sign that walking around is much more complex than it seems; we just take it for granted because, having been honed to perfection by evolution, itвЂ™s mostly done subconsciously. The company Narrative Science has an AI system that can write pretty good summaries of baseball games, but not novels, because-pace George F. Will-thereвЂ™s a lot more to life than to baseball games. Speech recognition is hard for computers because itвЂ™s hard to fill in the blanks-literally, the sounds speakers routinely elide-when you have no idea what the person is talking about. Algorithms can predict stock fluctuations but have no clue how they relate to politics. The more context a job requires, the less likely a computer will be able to do it soon. Common sense is important not just because your mom taught you so, but because computers donвЂ™t have it.. As technology progresses, an ever more intimate mix of human and machine takes shape. YouвЂ™re hungry; Yelp suggests some good restaurants. You pick one; GPS gives you directions. You drive; car electronics does the low-level control. We are all cyborgs already. The real story of automation is not what it replaces but what it enables. Some professions disappear, but many more are born.Most of all, automation makes all sorts of things possible that would be way too expensive if done by humans. ATMs replaced some bank tellers, but mainly they let us withdraw money any time, anywhere. If pixels had to be colored one at a time by human animators, there would be noToy Story and no video games..