But you still give Watson too little credit here. You have typically 3s from when the "answer" is shown to when you can click the buzzer. So in 3s Watson has to go through all of its databases and semantic links and formulate the question, from an answer that often doesn't even make sense to probably half of the US population. That's pretty impressive.
I understand and appreciate what Watson is doing. It's awesome and ground-breaking. However, with contestants of this skill level, most of the responses will be known by all contestants, and the real competition is how fast you can buzz in after the light turns on indicating the clue has been completed.
Think of it this way: if you had a human standing in Watson's spot, with a monitor displaying Watson's suggested response, I don't think that human would perform as well against the other human contestants. Sure, Watson would often come up with the correct response while the clue was being spoken by the host, but the human would still have to buzz in when the light turns on. If you buzz in too early, you get locked out for something like a quarter of a second. Watson would still be extremely awesome technology, but I don't think a human with access to Watson's output would compete at anywhere near the level that Watson did in the video.
Do you see what you're saying.. "contestants of this skill level"? It's Ken Jennings, Brad Rutter, and WATSON. Discussion over. The fact that there is a computer that can answer questions in 3s that put it at the level of the two greatest trivia players in history is THE story.
Some jeopardy answers:
Anagramed Animals -- A furry little pet: the rams
Some say the Bush administration's domestic spying conflicts with FISA, the Foreign Intelligence this Act
"R"2"D"2 -- More rubicund
Half the people in the US probably couldn't answer any of these at all, much less necessarily even know what the answer was referring to, period.
The fact that the computer may have an advantage at pressing the buzzer against the two best buzzer pushers of all time is a pretty small deal. IMHO. :-)
I am expressing marvel that a computer can respond to many Jeopardy! clues in 3 seconds. That is marvelous, amazing, and awesome. Don't infer that I am undervaluing that achievement.
The additional fact that this computer can beat human players is not impressive to me, because I know how Jeopardy! works. To sum everything up: it's a great feat of artificial intelligence and computer performance for Watson to generate correct responses so quickly; it's not a great feat for Watson to be able to buzz in faster than human competitors. I think IBM could have chosen a better sort of competition to truly show off Watson's abilities than a competition with reflexes as the final layer of competition.
"The best human contestants don’t wait for, but instead anticipate when Trebek will finish reading a clue. They time their “buzz” for the instant when the last word leaves Trebek’s mouth and the “Buzzer Enable” light turns on. Watson cannot anticipate. He can only react to the enable signal. While Watson reacts at an impressive speed, humans can and do buzz in faster than his best possible reaction time."
I suspect if anyone is good at anticipating the buzzer it is Jennings and Rutter -- the two best Jeopardy players in history. At least until next week...
I'm skeptical of that. Is the Watson's computer to solenoid path really slower than the brain to muscle path of a human? Sure, an anticipatory human could buzz in after the light is electronically triggered but before the luminescent fixture (LED, or whatever) fired up, but humans will also undoubtedly jump the gun and buzz in too early, causing them to be locked out. To say that a human, even a seasoned Jeopardy! player, could beat a computer and solenoid any significant portion of the time, is something I have a lot of trouble accepting.
I don't think its all that hard to believe. Remember that Watson also has to depress a physical button (the same buzzer everyone else uses).
The eye to finger path for humans is about 200ms. It probably takes about 100ms for Watson to physically press the button. So Watson is about 100ms faster. But that also gives humans about a 100ms window in which to beat Watson. This means that you need to start your press 100-200ms before Trebek finishes his last word.
That's pretty good sized window for most people given you are reading the question along with Trebek. If the person who turns the light on is very consistent, I think a human who is good at this could consistently beat Watson.
So you're saying that a human aided by a computer, internet connection, and access to additional data can answer intentionally formed trivia questions as well as an unmanned computer (although I suspect a fair bit slower)?
This is the biggest innovation in computers in my lifetime and kids are like, "but its no Twitter".
Watson doesn't have internet access. It has just learned from thousands of sources and thousands of Jeopardy! questions. Just like human Jeopardy! contestants.
"Reverse primary thrust, Marvin." That's what they say to me. "Open airlock number 3, Marvin." "Marvin, can you pick up that piece of paper?" Here I am, brain the size of a planet, and they ask me to pick up a piece of paper.
