As AI continues to advance, human-AI teams are inevitable. However, progress in AI is routinely measured in isolation, without a human in the loop. It is crucial to benchmark progress in AI, not just in isolation, but also in terms of how it translates to helping humans perform certain tasks, i.e., the performance of human-AI teams. In this work, we design a cooperative game - GuessWhich - to measure human-AI team performance in the specific context of the AI being a visual conversational agent. GuessWhich involves live interaction between the human and the AI. The AI, which we call ALICE, is provided an image which is unseen by the human. Following a brief description of the image, the human questions ALICE about this secret image to identify it from a fixed pool of images. We measure performance of the human-ALICE team by the number of guesses it takes the human to correctly identify the secret image after a fixed number of dialog rounds with ALICE. We compare performance of the human-ALICE teams for two versions of ALICE. Our human studies suggest a counterintuitive trend - that while AI literature shows that one version outperforms the other when paired with an AI questioner bot, we find that this improvement in AI-AI performance does not translate to improved human-AI performance. This suggests a mismatch between benchmarking of AI in isolation and in the context of human-AI teams.
Turing Test. Finally, our game is in line with ideas in @cite_19 , re-imagining the traditional Turing Test for state-of-the-art AI systems, taking the pragmatic view that an effective AI teammate need not appear human-like, act or be mistaken for one, provided its behavior does not feel jarring or baffle teammates, leaving them wondering not about what it is thinking but whether it is.
@cite_19
300525892 2129824148 2604175534 2786377825
As language and visual understanding by machines progresses rapidly, we are observing an increasing interest in holistic architectures that tightly interlink both modalities in a joint learning and inference process. This trend has allowed the community to progress towards more challenging and open tasks and refueled the hope at achieving the old AI dream of building machines that could pass a turing test in open domains. In order to steadily make progress towards this goal, we realize that quantifying performance becomes increasingly difficult. Therefore we ask how we can precisely define such challenges and how we can evaluate different algorithms on this open tasks? In this paper, we summarize and discuss such challenges as well as try to give answers where appropriate options are available in the literature. We exemplify some of the solutions on a recently presented dataset of question-answering task based on real-world indoor images that establishes a visual turing challenge. Finally, we argue despite the success of unique ground-truth annotation, we likely have to step away from carefully curated dataset and rather rely on 'social consensus' as the main driving force to create suitable benchmarks. Providing coverage in this inherently ambiguous output space is an emerging challenge that we face in order to make quantifiable progress in this area. We exploit the gap in ability between human and machine vision systems to craft a family of automatic challenges that tell human and machine users apart via graphical interfaces including Internet browsers. Turing proposed (1950) a method whereby human judges might validate "artificial intelligence" by failing to distinguish between human and machine interlocutors. Stimulated by the "chat room problem", and influenced by the CAPTCHA project of (2000), we propose a variant of the Turing test using pessimal print: that is, low-quality images of machine-printed text synthesized pseudo-randomly over certain ranges of words, typefaces, and image degradations. We show experimentally that judicious choice of these ranges can ensure that the images are legible to human readers but illegible to several of the best present-day optical character recognition (OCR) machines. Our approach is motivated by a decade of research on performance evaluation of OCR machines and on quantitative stochastic models of document image quality. The slow pace of evolution of OCR and other species of machine vision over many decades suggests that pessimal print will defy automated attack for many years. Applications include 'bot' barriers and database rationing. Since Alan Turing envisioned artificial intelligence, technical progress has often been measured by the ability to defeat humans in zero-sum encounters (e.g., Chess, Poker, or Go). Less attention has been given to scenarios in which human–machine cooperation is beneficial but non-trivial, such as scenarios in which human and machine preferences are neither fully aligned nor fully in conflict. Cooperation does not require sheer computational power, but instead is facilitated by intuition, cultural norms, emotions, signals, and pre-evolved dispositions. Here, we develop an algorithm that combines a state-of-the-art reinforcement-learning algorithm with mechanisms for signaling. We show that this algorithm can cooperate with people and other algorithms at levels that rival human cooperation in a variety of two-player repeated stochastic games. These results indicate that general human–machine cooperation is achievable using a non-trivial, but ultimately simple, set of algorithmic mechanisms. The ability of intelligent agents to play games in human-like fashion is popularly considered a benchmark of progress in Artificial Intelligence. Similarly, performance on multi-disciplinary tasks such as Visual Question Answering (VQA) is considered a marker for gauging progress in Computer Vision. In our work, we bring games and VQA together. Specifically, we introduce the first computational model aimed at Pictionary, the popular word-guessing social game. We first introduce Sketch-QA, an elementary version of Visual Question Answering task. Styled after Pictionary, Sketch-QA uses incrementally accumulated sketch stroke sequences as visual data. Notably, Sketch-QA involves asking a fixed question ("What object is being drawn?") and gathering open-ended guess-words from human guessers. We analyze the resulting dataset and present many interesting findings therein. To mimic Pictionary-style guessing, we subsequently propose a deep neural model which generates guess-words in response to temporally evolving human-drawn sketches. Our model even makes human-like mistakes while guessing, thus amplifying the human mimicry factor. We evaluate our model on the large-scale guess-word dataset generated via Sketch-QA task and compare with various baselines. We also conduct a Visual Turing Test to obtain human impressions of the guess-words generated by humans and our model. Experimental results demonstrate the promise of our approach for Pictionary and similarly themed games.