Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday July 15 2019, @04:22AM   Printer-friendly
from the we'll-optimize-the-computes-with-AI dept.

Facebook VP: AI has a compute dependency problem

In one of his first public speaking appearances since joining Facebook to lead its AI initiatives, VP Jérôme Pesenti expressed concern about the growing amount of compute power needed to create powerful AI systems.

“I can tell you this is keeping me up at night,” Pesenti said. “The peak compute companies like Facebook and Google can afford for an experiment, we are reaching that already.”

More software innovation will be required if artificial intelligence is to grow unhindered, he said, and optimization of hardware and software — rather than brute force compute — may be critical to AI in years ahead.

Examples of systems less reliant on compute for innovative breakthroughs include Pluribus, an AI system developed by Facebook AI Research and Carnegie Mellon University and introduced today, that can take on world-class poker players. In an article in Science, researchers said Pluribus only required $150 in cloud computing to train.

The end of Moore’s Law means the compute needed to create the most advanced AI is going up.

In fact, Pesenti cited an OpenAI analysis that found the compute necessary to create state-of-the-art systems has gone up 10 times each year since 2012.

“We still see gains with increase of compute, but the pressure from the problem is just going to become bigger,” Pesenti said. “I think we will still continue to use more compute, you will still net, but it will go slower, because you cannot keep pace with 10 times a year. That’s just not possible.”


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 15 2019, @10:01PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 15 2019, @10:01PM (#867340)

    There isn't much evidence to suggest that electrochemical functions aren't the main actors, and there's a lot of evidence to suggest that they are, so at this point the various quantum neuron theories that I've seen bandied about are not very persuasive.

    This ranges from: "it seems possible that neurons have the regularity to manage quantum entanglements and therefore it is plausible that this has a computational value to the brain" through to: "cognition is TOO COMPLEX for just NEURONS, man! It's gotta be QUANTUM SHIT!"

    The field certainly attracts its share of nuts.