Another Release from Google’s AI Brain Trust, and More Complaints

Less than two years after Google released two scientists who criticized the inaccuracy that was built into intelligence, the company fired the scientist who asked for a copy of its publication. of the ability of a particular type of intelligence used to make a computer.

The scientist, Satrajit Chatterjee, led a team of scholars in a series of celebratory research papers, which appeared last year in the journal Nature Research and say that the computer can build some kind of computer chip faster and better than human.

Dr. Chatterjee, 43, was fired in March, shortly after Google told its team it would not publish a letter that opposed some of the claims in Nature, say four people know about the situation where he was not allowed to speak openly on the matter. Google acknowledged in a statement that Dr. Chatterjee has been “removed for some reason.”

Google declined to comment on Dr. Chatterjee’s release, but he has full defense of the research he has criticized and he refuses to publish his measure.

Zoubin Ghahramani, vice president of Google Research, said in a statement: little about the demands of the next export, and it does not follow our adventurous standards. “

Dr. Chatterjee release is a new example of conflict within and around the Google Brain, AI research team considers key to the company’s future. After spending millions of dollars to hire top scientists and develop a new type of computer automation, Google has struggled with many complaints about its design, use and description of technology. naus laus zis.

The frustration of Google AI scientists reveals a major challenge across the technology industry, which raises many questions about new AI technologies and the social issues that have plagued them. affects technology and their developers.

The recent controversy also follows the pattern of aware of the removal and disclosure of violations by Google AI scientists, a growing concern for the company. Predict his future by infusing artificial intelligence for everything he does. Sundar Pichai, head of Google’s parent company, Alphabet, has compared AI to the advent of electricity or fire, calling it one of the most important human ventures.

Google Brain began as an outside project more than a decade ago when a team of scientists developed a process that learned about cats in YouTube videos. Google executives have taken to the expectation that technology can learn the skills on their own, they have expanded rapidly, creating a foundation for rebuilding the company with these skills. This new genius. The research team has become a symbol of the company’s greatest philosophy.

Prior to his dismissal, Dr. Gebru is seeking permission to publish research data on how AI-based language systems, including technology developed by Google, can use abusive and discriminatory language. they learn from books and websites. Dr. Gebru said he was outraged by Google’s response to the complaint, including his refusal to publish the document.

A few months later, the company fired another group leader, Margaret Mitchell, who publicly denounced Google’s management of the incident with Dr. Gebru. The company said that Dr. Mitchell has violated his authority.

The paper in Nature, published last June, supports a tool called educational support, which states that it can improve the design of computer equipment. Technology has been hailed as a breakthrough in the field of intelligent technology and a major improvement over existing processes for chip production. Google has said it uses this process to develop its own chips for intellectual property.

Google has been working to apply the technology learning process for chip design for years, and it announced a similar feature a year ago. Around that time, Google asked Dr. Chatterjee, who has a doctorate in computer science from the University of California, Berkeley, and has worked as a researcher at Intel, looks at ways to sell or authorize a chip maker. , people know about the problem say.

But Dr. Chatterjee specifically mentioned in an email inside about some of the applications and asked if the machine had been rigorously tested, three of us said.

As the controversy over the search continued, Google announced another paper for Nature. For the export, Google made some changes to the previous document and removed the names of the two authors, who worked closely with Dr. Chatterjee and also raised concerns about important applications, people said.

When the new material was announced, some Google researchers were surprised. They believe it did not follow the approval process announced by Jeff Dean, the company’s senior vice president who oversees most of its AI efforts. Dr. Gebru fired, people say.

Google and one of the two directors of the script, Anna Goldie, who co-authored it with computer scientist Azalia Mirhoseini, said that a change in the previous version of the paper did not necessarily mean that there would be any changes. totally agree. Google has authorized Dr. Chatterjee and a handful of internal and external scholars to work on the paper have opposed some of the proposals.

The team submitted a grievance to the so-called resolution team for approval. Months later, the document was rejected.

The scholars working on the denial paper have stated that they want to present the issue to Mr. Pichai and Alphabet board. They argued that Google’s decision not to declare the attack violated its own AI principles, including supporting a good research model. Shortly afterwards, Dr. Chatterjee warned that he was no longer an employee, people said.

Ms. Goldie said Dr. Chatterjee has asked to take control of their position in 2019 and that they have denied. When he later criticized her, he said, he could not acknowledge his complaint and ignored the evidence they were given in response.

“Sat Chatterjee has been fighting the media for me and Azalia for over two years now,” Ms. Goldie said in a statement.

He said the work was evaluated by Nature, one of the most reputable research publications. And he added that Google has used their methods to create new chips and that these chips are now used in Google computer data centers.

Laurie M. Burgess, Dr. Chatterjee’s lawyer said he was disappointed that “Nature writers have tried to shut down the discussion of science by criticizing and criticizing Dr. Chatterjee for its easy search of facts. profit. ” Ms. Burgess also asked about the leadership of Dr. Dean, who is one of the 20 authors of the Nature paper.

“Jeff Dean’s move to ban the release of all experimental data, not just information that supports his views, should have a significant impact on social communities. research and the wider community that uses Google services and products, “Ms. Burgess said.

Dr. Dean did not respond to a request for comment.

After the announcement was made with experts and other experts outside of Google, the controversy spread around the world with researchers who specialized in chip development.

Chip maker Nvidia says it has taken the lead in developing chips similar to Google, but some experts are unsure what Google research means for the larger tech industry.

“If this works, it will be great,” said Jens Lienig, a professor at Dresden University of Technology in Germany. about AI technology explained in Google Docs. “But it’s not clear if it works.”

Leave a Comment