AI Talk Series, Episode 2: The Pros and Cons of AI

AI Talk系列,第2集:AI的优点和缺点

2023-04-21 00:00 Lilt

本文共1924个字,阅读需20分钟

阅读模式 切换至中文

AI Talk Series, Episode 2: The Pros and Cons of AI Welcome back to our AI Talk Series, where we’ll be sharing AI insights and predictions from Lilt’s co-founders and experts. If you didn’t have a chance to check out Episode 1, here is a link to the article. This week, we discuss the pros and cons of AI for businesses and the localization industry. A little background about our experts: Lilt’s founders, Spence Green and John DeNero met at Google, while working on Google Translate’s program. As researchers at Stanford and Berkeley, they both have experience working with natural language technology to make information accessible to everyone. They were amazed to learn that Google Translate wasn’t used for enterprise products and services inside the company and left to start their own company to address this need – Lilt. Lilt’s AI technology foundation is similar to ChatGPT and Google Translate, before our patented Contextual AI, Connector-first approach, and human-adapted feedback. We sat down with Spence and John to learn more about large language models and their thoughts on AI. What are the core benefits and downsides of generative AI? John: Let’s start with the definition of generative AI. Generative AI is when a computer creates something—often from scratch or from a prompt. So creating a translation is generative AI, but it can also create images, videos, and other media formats. It's hard because these things that get generated are complex in structure. They're not just making a single decision. Spence: Some of the machine learning systems that people might be familiar with are for labeling images or sentences—where you're just categorizing things. Here, you're generating structured objects from scratch based on some input, and translation is obviously an example of that. John: And humans are so good at generating language that we don't necessarily realize how many ways it can go wrong. When you have a long sentence, there's just a long list of ways in which there can be something wrong with it. And that's what makes generative AI hard, and why it took a while to get the breakthroughs that we see today. There are a thousand different factors you have to get right about every sentence: word choice, agreement, order, and whether you have the right level of specificity or ambiguity. And now we have systems that can actually handle all this stuff at once, which is kind of amazing.The core benefit is that there's a whole lot more generation work that should be done in the world than people really can do. Translation is a prime example, where there's so much content that should be translated into so many languages at publication-quality—so there's no degradation in the experience that people have when they read it in another language—but not all of it gets translated because there are only so many translators in the world to do the work. And the costs are such that it just doesn't happen.That's really a shame. So I think the promise of generative AI is to get more done in the world and to make sure that all the important work that enables modern life happens by augmenting the people with the professional skills to do that work with AI. What are the promises and opportunities of AI that can affect the day-to-day operations for businesses? Spence: For translation, we've been building these systems where you use AI to augment what people generate, and it helps solve the problem that when you're doing translation work, you get a new document to translate and you just have a blank page—and that's where you start. Versus now, you can start with the machine's best prediction of what that translation is. And then it refines its predictions as you work together. I think that the broadening of this generative AI technology will broaden to other types of work, whether it's writing marketing articles or creating training documentation..So I think that there are a lot of opportunities for information creation that typically started with a blank cursor or you know, a blank canvas in Photoshop, where now you can start with a machine prediction that gets you going. That just makes you more efficient in the work that you do. John: Yeah, exactly. I think that anybody in a business setting knows that there are important things that just get delayed over and over again because there just isn't the capacity to do everything that should be done. What happens with generative AI, which is interesting, is that sometimes you ask it to generate a document and it does it really well, and then sometimes it misses something important. Sometimes it's just about slightly the wrong topic or it doesn't capture the main idea that you wanted to convey.So there is a role for people to figure out whether it did the right thing. And that could be very quick. In some cases, you read the first few sentences and see that one whole section is perfect. But then you go down and you say, “Oh, actually, I wanted something else for this other part.”And you have to go in and rewrite it. That's just part of working with a generative AI system and having a plan for figuring out how to validate and revise its output. That's the kind of thing that you can solve with the right process. At Lilt, we have quite an extensive process for making sure that there are no issues with the actual final translations, even if there were in the original generative AI output.That validation process is really critical and it's true for other things. You know, especially Spence, when we’re talking about generating marketing content or training content, people do have to be part of the process of supervising the AI and, and correcting its work just like you would with a junior employee. Spence: Totally. It’s the same concept you have of an editor in the newsroom or a senior partner revising or checking the work of a junior partner in a law firm. Same idea. Only now the junior partner is an AI system and not a human being. What are some problems with GenAI that we should be wary of? John: The biggest risk I see is that you have to know how to use it. I think that it's not like a junior employee in that you can give them broad directions and they'll figure it out because it's an AI system, not a person. And so it is very sensitive to the prompts and inputs you provide it. There is really quite a bit of care in engineering and design that goes into prompting the system so that you can get useful output, which you can work with. That's a new branch of applied artificial intelligence—figuring out how to take some big generative system and actually get it to produce the most useful results so that it can enable increased efficiency. So the idea that you can just ask it any question you want and it's always gonna do the right thing is the wrong mindset. Instead, you need to really take great care to prompt the system in order to generate the right results. Spence: Yeah. One of the things I've been thinking about is that there are some products now that will summarize email chains or a meeting—and those types of work products are used to inform decisions.And I think there will increasingly be AI-generated text, memos, presentations, and summaries that inform decision-making. People have this bias that’s well-known called algorithm aversion, which is they tend to have a higher standard for machines than they do for people. So if a person makes a mistake, they understand that. But if machines make mistakes, people have a much higher standard. So this has been one of the challenges with self-driving cars, for example. There are a lot of car accidents on the road all the time. And everybody knows that humans make driving mistakes and have accidents, but as soon as a machine has a wreck, it's on the front page news.I wonder as these systems get into day-to-day decision making and business—and it's certainly going to be kind of edge cases—if these mistakes will be magnified in some way because it's a machine-driven decision. I wonder how businesses will manage that. John: This is a great point. I think people will be very critical of these systems if they cause problems—even if those problems might have existed with people and without the technology. And actually, I think that's great. I think where we should end up with AI is to make better decisions than what we made without AI. Similarly, with self-driving cars, I think the aspiration should be that there are a lot less accidents on the road in the future than there are today. The same with translation. The outcomes should be that with AI assistance, the translation quality is more consistent and better—which is something that we observe at Lilt. What happens when you're coaching people to do their job better over time, each person can only write so many summaries or make so many decisions. And so you really can't invest 50 years of training somebody just for them to do a job for a year. But with AI, because it's so scalable, once you've built it, you can have it drive many cars or translate many sentences. It makes sense to put a tremendous amount of investment into the quality of what it generates.So, that's why Lilt exists. We can invest and concentrate our expertise in how to make translations work well. We have a big research team here in order to do that, which is way more than what you would invest if you were just training one small group of translators.Because once we build the system, we can use it for a lot of content. It's well justified. And so I think that's the same story that goes with summarization. There's been an unbelievable number of researchers and papers that have worked on figuring out how to summarize one document into a short description.But that all makes sense because once that technology works, it can be used so broadly over and over again that it justifies the investment of effort. So, yeah, I think it's okay to hold these systems to a really high standard. I think that's what we should expect from them, but we're not there in every case now. People should just be aware that it requires some amount of expertise in order to get the system to do what they want it to do. * * * Thanks for chatting, Spence and John! As businesses continue to embrace the change and opportunities that lie ahead, it will become increasingly important for global teams and leaders to invest in AI technologies to remain competitive. Tune in for the next episode of our AI Series for a deeper exploration of AI, large language models, and their impact on the translation industry.
AI Talk系列,第2集:AI的优点和缺点 欢迎回到我们的AI Talk系列,我们将分享Lilt联合创始人和专家的AI见解和预测。如果你没有机会查看第1集,这里有一个链接到文章。本周,我们将讨论人工智能对企业和本地化行业的利弊。 关于我们专家的一些背景:Lilt的创始人Spence Green和John DeNero在Google翻译项目中相遇。 作为斯坦福大学和伯克利分校的研究人员,他们都有使用自然语言技术使每个人都能访问信息的经验。他们惊讶地发现,谷歌翻译并没有用于公司内部的企业产品和服务,并离开了自己的公司,以解决这一需求- Lilt。 Lilt的AI技术基础类似于ChatGPT和Google翻译,在我们获得专利的上下文AI,连接器优先方法和人类适应反馈之前。我们与Spence和John坐下来了解更多关于大型语言模型以及他们对AI的想法。 生成式AI的核心优势和缺点是什么? John:让我们从生成式AI的定义开始。生成式人工智能是指计算机创建一些东西-通常是从头开始或从提示。因此,创建翻译是生成式AI,但它也可以创建图像,视频和其他媒体格式。这很难,因为生成的这些东西结构复杂。他们不只是在做一个决定。 Spence:人们可能熟悉的一些机器学习系统是用于标记图像或句子的,你只是对事物进行分类。在这里,您根据一些输入从头开始生成结构化对象,翻译显然就是一个例子。 约翰:人类是如此擅长创造语言,以至于我们不一定意识到有多少种方式会出错。当你有一个很长的句子时,就会有一长串的方式可能会有问题。这就是为什么生成式人工智能很难,也是为什么我们花了一段时间才取得今天看到的突破。每一句话都有一千个不同的因素需要你去把握:词语的选择,一致性,顺序,以及你是否有正确的具体性或模糊性。现在我们的系统可以同时处理所有这些事情,这很神奇。核心的好处是,世界上有更多的世代工作应该做,而不是人们真正能做的。翻译是一个很好的例子,有这么多的内容,应该翻译成这么多的语言在出版质量-所以没有退化的经验,人们有当他们阅读它在另一种语言-但不是所有的得到翻译,因为只有这么多的翻译在世界上做的工作。但代价如此之大,它根本就没有发生。这真的很遗憾。因此,我认为生成式人工智能的承诺是在世界上完成更多的工作,并确保所有使现代生活得以实现的重要工作都是通过增强人们的专业技能来完成人工智能工作。 人工智能的承诺和机会是什么,可以影响企业的日常运营? Spence:对于翻译,我们一直在构建这些系统,在这些系统中,您可以使用人工智能来增强人们生成的内容,它有助于解决当您进行翻译工作时,您需要翻译一份新文档,而您只有一张空白页-这就是您开始的地方。与现在相比,你可以从机器对翻译是什么的最佳预测开始。然后,当你们一起工作时,它会改进它的预测。我认为,这种生成式人工智能技术的扩展将扩展到其他类型的工作,无论是撰写营销文章还是创建培训文档。所以我认为有很多信息创造的机会,通常是从一个空白光标开始,或者你知道,在Photoshop中的一个空白画布,现在你可以从一个机器预测开始,让你继续。这只会让你在工作中更有效率。 约翰:是的,正是。我认为,任何一个在商业环境中的人都知道,有些重要的事情只是一次又一次地被推迟,因为没有能力做所有应该做的事情。有趣的是,生成式人工智能有时会要求它生成一个文档,它做得很好,但有时它会错过一些重要的东西。有时它只是稍微错误的主题,或者它没有抓住你想要传达的主要思想,所以人们有一个角色来判断它是否做了正确的事情。这可能很快。在某些情况下,你读了前几句,看到一整节都很完美。但当你走下去,你说,“哦,实际上,我想为另一部分做点别的。”你必须进入并重写它。这只是使用生成式人工智能系统的一部分,并有一个计划来弄清楚如何验证和修改其输出。这是那种你可以用正确的方法解决的问题。在Lilt,我们有一个相当广泛的过程来确保实际的最终翻译没有问题,即使在原始的生成AI输出中存在问题。这个验证过程非常关键,对于其他事情也是如此。你知道,特别是Spence,当我们谈论生成营销内容或培训内容时,人们必须参与监督AI的过程,并纠正其工作,就像你对待初级员工一样。 Spence:完全正确。这和你在新闻编辑室里的编辑或在律师事务所里的高级合伙人修改或检查初级合伙人的工作的概念是一样的。同样的想法。只是现在初级合伙人是一个人工智能系统,而不是人类。 GenAI有哪些问题是我们应该警惕的? 约翰:我认为最大的风险是你必须知道如何使用它。我认为这不像一个初级员工,你可以给他们大致的方向,他们会弄明白的,因为这是一个人工智能系统,而不是一个人。所以它对你提供的提示和输入非常敏感。在工程和设计中,确实有相当多的注意力进入提示系统,以便你可以得到有用的输出,你可以使用它。这是应用人工智能的一个新分支--弄清楚如何使用一些大型的生成系统,并让它产生最有用的结果,从而提高效率。所以,你可以问它任何你想问的问题,它总是会做正确的事情的想法是错误的心态。相反,您需要非常小心地提示系统,以便生成正确的结果。 斯宾塞:是的。我一直在思考的一件事是,现在有一些产品可以汇总电子邮件链或会议-这些类型的工作产品用于为决策提供信息。我认为将有越来越多的人工智能生成的文本,备忘录,演示文稿和摘要为决策提供信息。人们有一种叫做算法厌恶的偏见,也就是说,他们对机器的要求往往比对人的要求更高。所以如果一个人犯了错误,他们会理解的。但是如果机器犯了错误,人们的标准要高得多。例如,这是自动驾驶汽车面临的挑战之一。路上总是有很多车祸。每个人都知道人类会犯驾驶错误和发生事故,但是一旦机器出了事故,它就会上头版新闻。我想知道,随着这些系统进入日常决策和商业--这肯定会是一种边缘案例--这些错误是否会在某种程度上被放大,因为这是一个机器驱动的决策。我想知道企业将如何管理这一点。 约翰:这是一个很好的观点。我认为,如果这些系统造成问题,人们会非常批评它们,即使这些问题可能存在于人类身上,而不是技术。实际上,我觉得这很好。我认为我们最终应该在AI的帮助下做出比没有AI的情况下更好的决策。同样,对于自动驾驶汽车,我认为人们的愿望应该是未来道路上的事故比今天少得多。翻译也是如此。结果应该是,在人工智能的帮助下,翻译质量更加一致和更好-这是我们在Lilt观察到的。当你指导人们随着时间的推移把工作做得更好时,每个人只能写这么多总结或做这么多决定。所以你真的不能花50年的时间来训练一个人,只是为了让他们做一年的工作。但是有了人工智能,因为它是如此的可扩展,一旦你建立了它,你就可以让它驾驶许多汽车或翻译许多句子。投入大量的投资来提高它所产生的东西的质量是有意义的。所以,这就是Lilt存在的原因。我们可以投资并集中我们的专业知识,使翻译工作做得更好。我们有一个庞大的研究团队来做这件事,如果你只是培训一小群翻译,这比你投资的要多得多。因为一旦我们建立了系统,我们就可以用它来处理很多内容。很有道理。所以我认为这和总结是一样的。有大量的研究人员和论文致力于研究如何将一个文档总结成一个简短的描述。但这一切都是有意义的,因为一旦这项技术成功,它可以被广泛地反复使用,这证明了努力的投资是合理的。所以,是的,我认为把这些系统保持在一个非常高的标准是可以的。我认为这是我们应该对他们的期望,但我们现在并不是在每一个情况下都在那里。人们应该意识到,为了让系统做他们想让它做的事情,它需要一些专业知识。 * 我的天 谢谢你的聊天,斯宾塞和约翰!随着企业继续拥抱未来的变化和机遇,全球团队和领导者投资人工智能技术以保持竞争力将变得越来越重要。敬请收看我们的AI系列的下一集,深入探索AI、大型语言模型及其对翻译行业的影响。

以上中文文本为机器翻译,存在不同程度偏差和错误,请理解并参考英文原文阅读。

阅读原文