IBM Watson: Final Jeopardy! and the Future of Watson



After competing against the two greatest Jeopardy! champions of all time, the technology behind Watson will now be applied to some of the world’s most enticing challenges. Watch a breakdown of the match from Ken Jennings, Brad Rutter and the IBM team members as they look toward the future.

Visit ibmwatson.com for more information.

29 Replies to “IBM Watson: Final Jeopardy! and the Future of Watson”

  1. Jeopardy is nothing more than facts memorization, like trivial pursuit. It is hardly a true measure of all parts of intelligence, in fact it would measure only the least important parts. It is more closely related to a calculate than anything else. The worrisome thing about Watson's failure in Final Jeopardy is that it gave a factual answer that even this simplistic grid should have ruled out. Specifically, it is simply a FACT that Toronto is not located in the US and so any intelligent 5th grader would have ruled that possibility out, and left it blank or guessed an American airport at random rather than put down an answer that was ruled out. Thus, the breakthrough for Watson was not in the "intelligence" portion of its machine, but in its processing data (in its "hearing" it, etc.). But its flub in final showed more how FAR IBM has to go rather than anything else.

  2. Something about this bothers me a little, aside from the IBM people's smugness. Watson mispronounces "chic" and "shoe" as (what sounds like) "cheeK" and ""chew". If a human gave those responses, they'd be wrong based on the mispronunciation.
    With regard to a level playing field,
    "Even with a robotic "finger" pressing the buzzer, Watson remained faster than its human competitors. Ken Jennings noted, "If you're trying to win on the show, the buzzer is all," and that Watson "can knock out a microsecond-precise buzz every single time with little or no variation. Human reflexes can't compete with computer circuits in this regard."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_(computer)#Jeopardy.21
    I get why the performance of Watson in a Jeopardy match with humans is remarkable. But I also think more could be done to not disadvantage the humans.

  3. all statistical analysis is pointing to a world we never saw, this world has been and was always controlled by very powerful computers. the reality is we are only allowed to see a tiny piece of the real world because the measures of control are unthinkable by our standards. this world is very much controlled and very different then we ever thought.

  4. What is its purpose? Do we really need to rely on another gaget? I have never believed we need a machine to surpass human thought. At what point will it believe it self to be superior to man and will it hide this fact or reveal it self to us. Not an invalid question if it truly does learn and evolve!

  5. What is its purpose? Do we really need to rely on another gaget? I have never believed we need a machine to surpass human thought. At what point will it believe it self to be superior to man and will it hide this fact or reveal it self to us. Not an invalid question if it truly does learn and evolve!

Leave a Reply