{"id":2327,"date":"2012-03-17T09:32:33","date_gmt":"2012-03-17T17:32:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/?p=2327"},"modified":"2012-03-18T07:29:05","modified_gmt":"2012-03-18T15:29:05","slug":"computer-challenges-human-crossword","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/2012\/03\/computer-challenges-human-crossword\/","title":{"rendered":"Computer challenges human crossword puzzle solvers"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Many are familiar with the 1997 defeat of Garry Kasparov, the world&#8217;s reigning chess champion, by IBM&#8217;s &#8220;Deep Blue&#8221; computer [<a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/1997\/05\/12\/nyregion\/swift-and-slashing-computer-topples-kasparov.html\">1997 NY Times article<\/a>].  This feat was hailed as a major milestone in the development of artificially intelligent computer systems.<\/p>\n<p>But even this feat was overshadowed by the 2011 defeat of the two most successful contestants on the American quiz show Jeopardy!, by a new IBM-developed computer system named &#8220;Watson&#8221; [<a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2011\/02\/17\/science\/17jeopardy-watson.html\">2011 NY Times article<\/a>].  As we explained in a previous blog article, the Watson achievement was significantly more impressive than the Deep Blue because it involved &#8220;natural language understanding,&#8221; namely the intelligent &#8220;understanding,&#8221; in some sense, of ordinary English text [<a href=\"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/2011\/02\/what-does-watsons-victory-really-mean\">Math Drudge blog #1<\/a>].  Indeed, Watson more than Deep Blue well deserves the assessment of legendary Jeopardy! champ Ken Jennings, who wrote, on his computer tablet conceding victory to Watson, &#8220;I for one welcome our new computer overlords&#8221; [<a href=\"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/2011\/02\/ibms-watson-victorious-our-new-computer-overlord\">Math Drudge blog #2<\/a>].<\/p>\n<p>Now computer scientist Matthew Ginsberg has his eye on a similarly challenging problem:  Defeat the world&#8217;s best human crossword puzzle solvers.  Ginsberg, who has received a Ph.D. from Oxford and has written a book on artificial intelligence, is presently the Chief Executive Officer of On Time Systems in Eugene, OR.  He has already tested his computer program, known as &#8220;Dr. Fill,&#8221; in a series of crossword puzzle tournaments, finishing on top in three of 15 contests.<\/p>\n<p>Typical full-size newspaper crossword puzzles have roughly 140 words, and, as in Jeopardy!, the clues are often notoriously subtle.  As an example, in a 2010 <i>New York Times<\/i> crossword puzzle with the theme &#8220;rabbits,&#8221; the correct answer to clue &#8220;Famous bank robbers&#8221; was &#8220;BUNNYANDCLYDE.&#8221;  As another example, the correct answer for the clue &#8220;Apollo 11 and 12 (180 degrees)&#8221; was &#8220;SNOISSIWNOOW&#8221; (i.e., &#8220;MOON MISSIONS&#8221; written upside down and backwards).<\/p>\n<p>Obviously such machinations require some degree of imagination and creativity.  Or, at the least, the computer program&#8217;s analysis on other, more straightforward, clues must be so strong that it can still complete the puzzle in spite of its failing to &#8220;understand&#8221; some of the most subtle clues.<\/p>\n<p>Will Shortz, tournament director and crossword puzzle editor for the <i>New York Times<\/i>, who has seen a demonstration of &#8220;Dr. Fill&#8221; in action, believes that the computer program may crush human opponents on easier puzzles.  But on more difficult puzzles, particularly those with many subtle clues, it will be a closer match.<\/p>\n<p>David Ferrucci, leader of IBM&#8217;s Watson project, agrees that &#8220;Games are a great motivator for artificial intelligence &#8212; they push things forward.&#8221;  But he emphasizes that &#8220;what really matters is where it is taking us.&#8221;  He is now involved with an effort to commercialize Watson&#8217;s technology in the health care field.  Perhaps similar applications will be found for Dr. Fill.<\/p>\n<p>For additional details, see a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2012\/03\/17\/technology\/computer-matching-wits-with-humans-in-crossword-tournament.html\">2012 NY Times article<\/a>, from which some of the above is excerpted.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Many are familiar with the 1997 defeat of Garry Kasparov, the world&#8217;s reigning chess champion, by IBM&#8217;s &#8220;Deep Blue&#8221; computer [1997 NY Times article]. This feat was hailed as a major milestone in the development of artificially intelligent computer systems.<\/p>\n<p>But even this feat was overshadowed by the 2011 defeat of the two most successful contestants on the American quiz show Jeopardy!, by a new IBM-developed computer system named &#8220;Watson&#8221; [2011 NY Times article]. As we explained in a previous blog article, the Watson achievement was significantly more impressive than the Deep Blue because it involved &#8220;natural language understanding,&#8221; namely <\/p>\n<p>Continue reading <a href=\"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/2012\/03\/computer-challenges-human-crossword\/\">Computer challenges human crossword puzzle solvers<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2327","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news","odd"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2327","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2327"}],"version-history":[{"count":30,"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2327\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2357,"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2327\/revisions\/2357"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2327"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2327"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/experimentalmath.info\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2327"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}