TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

What are the differences between emergent behavior models like Watson and the statistics used in the proposed judicial tool?

The measurement tool that is proposed is just that, a measurement. In Lean Six Sigma, the statistics program would only fulfill the "M" portion of the DMAIC process of define, measure, analyze, improve and control. Without proper measurements, though, it is difficult to find valuable analytic tools as was made apparent by the sticky note anecdote. I am wondering if emergent behavior programs like Watson would be able to generate more accurate predictive statements. While a healthy skepticism of the capabilities of computers is warranted, there are an increasingly large list of tasks for which they exceed human capabilities. Providing tools such as these can help tremendously when called upon to make informed decisions, whether it applies to questions on Jeopardy, in hospitals or in the courtroom.

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Feb 17 2014: So Watson stays above the fray or can't admissible cry fowl when a crime scene is inconsistent to the crime or the prosecution builds its case on weak circumstantial evidence. It could only give us probabilities that out of x number of persons x number probably did xyz. Cleaver. What if Watson could only be used by the defense and not the prosecution. Would the prosecution lose more cases? The same with medicine using a legal ethics measurement of probabilities would it measure only a hospital's liability or patient vulnerability ?

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.