All

What are you looking for?

All
Projects
Results
Organizations

Quick search

  • Projects supported by TA ČR
  • Excellent projects
  • Projects with the highest public support
  • Current projects

Smart search

  • That is how I find a specific +word
  • That is how I leave the -word out of the results
  • “That is how I can find the whole phrase”

Question Answering by Humans and Machines: A Complexity-theoretic View

The result's identifiers

  • Result code in IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F67985807%3A_____%2F19%3A00505732" target="_blank" >RIV/67985807:_____/19:00505732 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Result on the web

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2018.08.012" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2018.08.012</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2018.08.012" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.tcs.2018.08.012</a>

Alternative languages

  • Result language

    angličtina

  • Original language name

    Question Answering by Humans and Machines: A Complexity-theoretic View

  • Original language description

    Question-answering systems like Watson beat humans when it comes to processing speed and memory. But what happens if we compensate for this? What are the fundamental differences in power between human and artificial agents in question answering? We explore this issue by defining new computational models for both agents and comparing their computational efficiency in interactive sessions. Concretely, human agents are modeled by means of cognitive automata, augmented with a form of background intelligence which gives the automata the possibility to query a given Turing machine and use the answers from one interaction to the next. On the other hand, artificial question-answering agents are modeled by QA-machines, which are Turing machines that can access a predefined, potentially infinite knowledge base (‘advice’) and have a bounded amount of learning space at their disposal. We show that cognitive automata and QA-machines have exactly the same potential in realizing question-answering sessions, provided the resource bounds in one model are sufficient to match the abilities of the other. In particular, polynomially bounded cognitive automata with background intelligence (i.e. human agents) prove to be equivalent to polynomially bounded QA-machines with logarithmic learning space. It generalizes Pippenger's theorem on the computational power of switching circuits (without background intelligence) to a foundational result for question answering in cognitive science. The framework reveals why QA-machines have a fundamental advantage.

  • Czech name

  • Czech description

Classification

  • Type

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

  • CEP classification

  • OECD FORD branch

    10201 - Computer sciences, information science, bioinformathics (hardware development to be 2.2, social aspect to be 5.8)

Result continuities

  • Project

  • Continuities

    I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Others

  • Publication year

    2019

  • Confidentiality

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Data specific for result type

  • Name of the periodical

    Theoretical Computer Science

  • ISSN

    0304-3975

  • e-ISSN

  • Volume of the periodical

    777

  • Issue of the periodical within the volume

    19 July

  • Country of publishing house

    NL - THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS

  • Number of pages

    10

  • Pages from-to

    464-473

  • UT code for WoS article

    000473372800030

  • EID of the result in the Scopus database

    2-s2.0-85054352634