The End of Vagueness: Technological Epistemicism, Surveillance Capitalism, and Explainable Artificial Intelligence
Tóm tắt
Artificial Intelligence (AI) pervades humanity in 2022, and it is notoriously difficult to understand how certain aspects of it work. There is a movement—Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)—to develop new methods for explaining the behaviours of AI systems. We aim to highlight one important philosophical significance of XAI—it has a role to play in the elimination of vagueness. To show this, consider that the use of AI in what has been labeled surveillance capitalism has resulted in humans quickly gaining the capability to identify and classify most of the occasions in which languages are used. We show that the knowability of this information is incompatible with what a certain theory of vagueness—epistemicism—says about vagueness. We argue that one way the epistemicist could respond to this threat is to claim that this process brought about the end of vagueness. However, we suggest an alternative interpretation, namely that epistemicism is false, but there is a weaker doctrine we dub technological epistemicism, which is the view that vagueness is due to ignorance of linguistic usage, but the ignorance can be overcome. The idea is that knowing more of the relevant data and how to process it enables us to know the semantic values of our words and sentences with higher confidence and precision. Finally, we argue that humans are probably not going to believe what future AI algorithms tell us about the sharp boundaries of our vague words unless the AI involved can be explained in terms understandable by humans. That is, if people are going to accept that AI can tell them about the sharp boundaries of the meanings of their words, then it is going to have to be XAI.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Alpaydin, E. (2020). Introduction to machine learning (4th ed.). MIT Press.
Altschuler, D., Parsons, T., & Schwarzschild, R. (2019). A Course in semantics. MIT.
Bacon, A. (2018). Vagueness and thought. Oxford University Press.
Baker, C., Saxe, R., & Tenenbaum, J. (2011). Bayesian theory of mind: Modeling joint belief-desire attribution. In Proceedings of the annual meeting of the cognitive science society (Vol. 33). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5rk7z59q
Ball, D., & Rabern, B. (Eds.). (2018). The science of meaning. Oxford University Press.
Barnes, E. (2010). Ontic vagueness: A Guide for the perplexed. Nous, 44, 607–627.
Bonnet, P., Goëau, H., Hang, S. T., Lasseck, M., Šulc, M., Malécot, V., Jauzein, P., Melet, V., You, C., & Joly, A. (2018). Plant identification: Experts vs. machines in the era of deep learning. In A. Joly, S. Vrochidis, K. Karatzas, A. Karppinen, & P. Bonnet (Eds.), Multimedia tools and applications for environmental & biodiversity informatics (pp. 131–150). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76445-0_8
Caie, M. (2012). Vagueness and semantic indiscriminability. Philosophical Studies, 161, 365–377.
Cappelen, H. (2018). Fixing language: An Essay on conceptual engineering. Oxford University Press.
Carter, S., Armstrong, Z., Schubert, L., Johnson, I., & Olah, C. (2019). Activation Atlas. Distill. https://distill.pub/2019/activation-atlas.
Castroviejo, E., McNally, L., & Sassoon, G. W. (Eds.). (2018). The Semantics of gradability, vagueness, and scale structure. Springer.
Chierchia, G., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2000). Meaning and grammar: Introduction to semantics (2nd ed.). MIT.
Davidson, D. (1967). The logical form of action sentences. In N. Rescher (Ed.), The logic of decision and action. University of Pittsburgh Press.
de Silva, B., Higdon, D., Brunton, S., & Kutz, J. N. (2020). Discovery of physics from data: Universal laws and discrepancies. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2020.00025
Dietz, R., & Murzi, S. (Eds.). (2010). Cuts and clouds: Vagueness, its nature and logic. Oxford University Press.
Doshi-Velez, F., & Kim, B. (2017). Towards a rigorous science of interpretable machine learning. Preprint retrieved from arXiv:1702.08608v2.
Dowty, D., Wall, R., & Peters, S. (1980). Introduction to Montague semantics. Kluwer.
Égré, P. (2015). Explanation in linguistics. Philosophy Compass, 10, 451–462. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12225
Fine, K. (2020). Vagueness: A global approach. Oxford University Press.
Gillon, B. (2019). Natural language semantics: Formation and valuation. MIT.
Gilpin, L., Bau, D., Yuan, B., Bajwa, A., Specter, M., & Kagal, L. (2019). Explaining explanations: An overview of interpretability of machine learning. Preprint retrieved from arXiv:1806.00069. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1806.00069
Gomez-Torrente, M. (1997). Two problems for an epistemicist view of vagueness. Philosophical Issues, 8, 237–245. https://doi.org/10.2307/1523008
GPT-3. (2020, September 8). A robot wrote this entire article. Are you scared yet, human? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/08/robot-wrote-this-article-gpt-3
Greenough, P. (2003). Vagueness: a minimal theory. Mind, 112(446), 235–281.
Gunning, D. (2017). Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Program Update. US Department of Defense, November 2017. https://www.darpa.mil/attachments/XAIProgramUpdate.pdf
Hawley, K. (2019). How to be trustworthy. Oxford University Press.
Hawthorne, J. (2006). Epistemicism and semantic plasticity. Metaphysical Essays (pp. 185–210). Oxford University Press.
Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2018, March 30). Cambridge Analytica and online manipulation. Scientific American. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/cambridge-analytica-and-online-manipulation/
Jullien, M., Valentino, M., & Freitas, A. (2022). Do transformers encode a foundational ontology? Probing abstract classes in natural language. Preprint retrieved from arXiv:2201.10262. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.10262
Kennedy, C. (2011). Vagueness and comparison. In P. Égré & N. Klinedinst (Eds.), Vagueness and language use (pp. 73–97). Palgrave Macmillian.
Ko, B. C. (2018). A Brief review of facial emotion recognition based on visual information. Sensors, 18, 401. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18020401
Kölbel, M. (2010). Vagueness as semantic. In R. Dietz & S. Murzi (Eds.), Cuts and clouds: Vagueness, its nature, and its logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199570386.003.0018
Kosinski, M., & Wang, Y. (2018). Deep neural networks are more accurate than humans at detecting sexual orientation from facial images. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114, 246–257.
Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., & Graepel, T. (2013). Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. PNAS, 110(15), 5802–5805. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218772110
Lundberg, S., & Lee, S.-I. (2017). A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. arXiv:1705.07874 [cs.AI]
MacFarlane, J. (2020a). Lecture 1: Vagueness and communication. Journal of Philosophy, 117(11/12), 593–616. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil202011711/1240
MacFarlane, J. (2020b). Lecture II: Seeing through the clouds. Journal of Philosophy, 117(11/12), 617–642. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil202011711/1241
MacFarlane, J. (2020c). Lecture III: Indeterminacy as indecision. Journal of Philosophy, 117(11/12), 643–667. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil202011711/1242
Marcus, G., & Davis, E. (2019). Rebooting AI: Building artificial intelligence we can trust. Pantheon Books.
Molnar, C. (2021). Interpretable machine learning: A Guide for making black box models explainable. Lean Publishing.
Mosdell, M. (2015). When to think like an epistemicist. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 45(4), 538–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2015.1112114
Olah, C., Mordvintsev, A., & Schubert, L. (2017). Feature Visualization. Distill. https://distill.pub/2017/feature-visualization
Olah, C., Satyanarayan, A., Johnson, I., Carter, S., Schubert, L., Ye, K., & Mordvintsev, A. (2018). The Building blocks of interpretability. Distill. https://distill.pub/2018/building-blocks
Oms, S., & Zardini, I. (Eds.). (2019). The Sorites paradox. Oxford University Press.
Pater, J. (2019). Generative linguistics and neural networks at 60: foundation, friction, and fusion. Language, 95(1), 41–74.
Pearl, L. S. (2019). Fusion is great, and interpretable fusion could be exciting for theory generation. Language, 95(1), 109–114.
Plunkett, D. (2015). Which concepts should we use?: Metalinguistic negotiations and the methodology of philosophy. Inquiry, 58(7), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2015.1080184
Potts, C. (2019). A case for deep learning in semantics. Language. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2019.0019
Raffman, D. (2014). Unruly words: A Study of vague language. Oxford University Press.
Ripley, D. (2021). Précis of uncut. Análisis Filosófico, 41(2), 235–260. https://doi.org/10.36446/af.2021.462
Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2020). Artificial intelligence: A Modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson.
Salles, S. (2021). Vagueness as arbitrariness: Outline of a theory of vagueness. Springer.
Sassoon, G. (2013). Vagueness, gradability and typicality: The Interpretation of adjectives and nouns. Brill Publishing.
Schmidt, M., & Lipson, H. (2009). Distilling free-form natural laws from experimental data. Science, 324(5923), 81–85. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.116589
Sennet, A. (2012). Semantic plasticity and epistemicism. Philosophical Studies, 161(2), 273–285.
Sinha, S.K., Kumar, S., Kumar, S., Katiyar, G., & Chandola, R. (2021). Plant identification using machine learning. In 2021 Asian conference on innovation in technology (ASIANCON) (pp. 1–4). https://doi.org/10.1109/ASIANCON51346.2021.9544670
Sorensen, R. (2001). Vagueness and contradiction. Oxford University Press.
Sorensen, R. (2018). Vagueness. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2018 ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/vagueness/
Tonhauser, J., & Matthewson, L. (2015). Empirical evidence in research on meaning. http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/002595. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.737.4344&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Thommasson, A. (2018). Ontology made easy. Oxford University Press.
Tshitoyan, V., Dagdelen, J., Weston, L., Dunn, A., Rong, Z., Kononova, O., Persson, K. A., Ceder, G., & Jain, A. (2019). Unsupervised word embeddings capture latent knowledge from materials science literature. Nature, 571, 95–98. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1335-8
Williamson, T. (1994). Vagueness. Routledge.
Williamson, T. (2000). Knowledge and its limits. Oxford University Press.
Wills, J. (2017). Tug of war: Surveillance capitalism, military contracting, and the rise of the security state. McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Wright, C. (2021). The Riddle of vagueness: Essays 1975–2020. Oxford University Press.
Wu, S. G., Bao, F. S., Xu, E. Y., Wang, Y., Chang, Y., & Xiang, Q. (2007). A Leaf recognition algorithm for plant classification using probabilistic neural network. In IEEE 7th International symposium on signal processing and information technology (pp. 11–16). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSPIT.2007.4458016
Wu, T., & Tegmark, M. (2019). Toward an artificial intelligence physicist for unsupervised learning. Physical Review E, 100, 033311.
Youyou, W., Kosinski, M., & Stillwell, D. (2015). Computer-based personality judgments are more accurate than those made by humans. PNAS, 112(4), 1036–1040. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1418680112
Zimmerman, A. (2020, July 30). Philosophers On GPT-3 (updated with replies by GPT-3). Daily Nous. https://dailynous.com/2020/07/30/philosophers-gpt-3/
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The Fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Profile Books.