Fall 2024
|
|
By Tony Mitchell
When chemists were still known as alchemists, one of the questions they had was whether there was a substance that dissolved everything. And if there were, what would you put it in? Obviously, if this substance dissolved everything, it would dissolve the container you put it in. It would also dissolve everything it contacted, creating havoc and destruction. This leads to another question: How could we study such a ”super solvent”?
Could we perhaps use AI systems? We could provide the AI system with information concerning the nature of solvents and solutions, as well as information about the nature of materials that make up containers, and a discussion of bonding and why containers normally do not react with the materials that are put in them.
AI systems have been used to solve other chemistry questions. One research group, for example, used an AI system to reconstruct the periodic table from existing data (1) (though it was not clear if the results included the noble gases).
When chemists were still known as alchemists, one of the questions they had was whether there was a substance that dissolved everything. And if there were, what would you put it in? Obviously, if this substance dissolved everything, it would dissolve the container you put it in. It would also dissolve everything it contacted, creating havoc and destruction. This leads to another question: How could we study such a ”super solvent”?
Could we perhaps use AI systems? We could provide the AI system with information concerning the nature of solvents and solutions, as well as information about the nature of materials that make up containers, and a discussion of bonding and why containers normally do not react with the materials that are put in them.
AI systems have been used to solve other chemistry questions. One research group, for example, used an AI system to reconstruct the periodic table from existing data (1) (though it was not clear if the results included the noble gases).
There must be an active effort to keep humans in the equation and in control, not just part of the solution. |
AI systems can achieve results that humans may not be able to. We can set up an AI system to analyze a series of digital images (such as X-rays, MRI, and CAT scans) to detect the presence of cancer cells at a resolution beyond the capabilities of the human eye. But to do this, someone must supply the images showing cancer cells so that the system can learn what to look for. If the system does not have this information, it cannot determine what is a cancer cell and what is not.
At the present time, AI systems are not intelligent. They do not create new information—they only copy current information. It still takes a human to create new information.
While some may use AI to write reports, all the system is doing is gathering all the information that can be found on the web that is related to the topic and putting it together in a readable format. But this system has not created any new information, and, in my opinion, the ability to create new information is one hallmark o intelligence.
Joshua Conrad Jackson, a professor and lead researcher at Chicago Booth, conducted a study about the ability of an AI-system to produce a sermon. He concluded:
Our research arrives at a point where automation is pervading every job industry, and it suggests that some professions may not be automated so easily. Robots may struggle in professions, like priests or monks, that require high levels of credibility (2).
AI systems can gather large amounts of data, but it is becoming clear that this process cannot differentiate between good and bad data. Reports created from this approach contain serious errors, so the veracity of any AI-generated content may have to be questioned.
AI systems are also being shown to be discriminatory (3). Not everyone gains from the use of such systems. The use of AI systems may only widen the digital divide we see developing today. In addition, the approach used by AI systems seems to ignore standard privacy protections (granted that we humans often fail to observe them too).
What is to stop an AI system from being used to develop potentially hazardous materials? This brings us back to the idea of a super solvent imagined by the alchemists. For all the benefits we might gain, the most important questions to ask are: Why would you want to synthesize such a substance? and What value would there be in even designing a substance that might destroy the world?
In the end, do the benefits gained from the use of AI systems outweigh the negative values? Can AI be taught to differentiate between good and bad data? Can AI understand the nature of privacy protection and other laws related to the use of personal information?
I am not opposed to the development of new technologies if it will make my work easier to accomplish. I do use current technology (personal computer, the Internet, online correspondence, etc.) to share the results of my work. But the systems that I use only aid in what I do—they do not do the work for me.
In the Star Trek movie Insurrection, one of the Ba’ku leaders explains why his group rejected technology:
We believe that when you create a machine to do the work of a man, you take something away from the man.
Perhaps the ultimate question that must be asked is: What will the future be like? Will the future be human-driven or technology-driven? Will it be progressive and positive or will our reliance and possibly subservience lead to the destruction of humankind?
As we move to an even more technologically oriented society, we must not be blinded by the speed of progress. There must be an active effort to keep humans in the equation and in control, not just part of the solution.
References
1. “Stanford AI recreates chemistry’s periodic table of elements.” Stanford News - Chemistry (June 26, 2018). Link
2. Brahambhatt, R. “Researchers tried out AI preachers—and it didn't go so well.” ZME Science (July 27, 2023). Link
3. Chen, Z. “Ethics and discrimination in artificial intelligence-enabled recruitment practices.” Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10, 567 (2023). Link
Dr. Tony Mitchell earned a doctorate in Science Education with an emphasis on chemical education from the University of Iowa in 1990. He also earned a B. S. in chemistry from Truman State University (1971) and a M. Ed. from the University of Missouri – Columbia (1975). He served as a lay speaker and lay minister in the United Methodist Church for some twenty years. He continues to look at the how science and faith intersect and interact. His thoughts on both areas can be found on his blog, “Thoughts from The Heart On The Left.”
At the present time, AI systems are not intelligent. They do not create new information—they only copy current information. It still takes a human to create new information.
While some may use AI to write reports, all the system is doing is gathering all the information that can be found on the web that is related to the topic and putting it together in a readable format. But this system has not created any new information, and, in my opinion, the ability to create new information is one hallmark o intelligence.
Joshua Conrad Jackson, a professor and lead researcher at Chicago Booth, conducted a study about the ability of an AI-system to produce a sermon. He concluded:
Our research arrives at a point where automation is pervading every job industry, and it suggests that some professions may not be automated so easily. Robots may struggle in professions, like priests or monks, that require high levels of credibility (2).
AI systems can gather large amounts of data, but it is becoming clear that this process cannot differentiate between good and bad data. Reports created from this approach contain serious errors, so the veracity of any AI-generated content may have to be questioned.
AI systems are also being shown to be discriminatory (3). Not everyone gains from the use of such systems. The use of AI systems may only widen the digital divide we see developing today. In addition, the approach used by AI systems seems to ignore standard privacy protections (granted that we humans often fail to observe them too).
What is to stop an AI system from being used to develop potentially hazardous materials? This brings us back to the idea of a super solvent imagined by the alchemists. For all the benefits we might gain, the most important questions to ask are: Why would you want to synthesize such a substance? and What value would there be in even designing a substance that might destroy the world?
In the end, do the benefits gained from the use of AI systems outweigh the negative values? Can AI be taught to differentiate between good and bad data? Can AI understand the nature of privacy protection and other laws related to the use of personal information?
I am not opposed to the development of new technologies if it will make my work easier to accomplish. I do use current technology (personal computer, the Internet, online correspondence, etc.) to share the results of my work. But the systems that I use only aid in what I do—they do not do the work for me.
In the Star Trek movie Insurrection, one of the Ba’ku leaders explains why his group rejected technology:
We believe that when you create a machine to do the work of a man, you take something away from the man.
Perhaps the ultimate question that must be asked is: What will the future be like? Will the future be human-driven or technology-driven? Will it be progressive and positive or will our reliance and possibly subservience lead to the destruction of humankind?
As we move to an even more technologically oriented society, we must not be blinded by the speed of progress. There must be an active effort to keep humans in the equation and in control, not just part of the solution.
References
1. “Stanford AI recreates chemistry’s periodic table of elements.” Stanford News - Chemistry (June 26, 2018). Link
2. Brahambhatt, R. “Researchers tried out AI preachers—and it didn't go so well.” ZME Science (July 27, 2023). Link
3. Chen, Z. “Ethics and discrimination in artificial intelligence-enabled recruitment practices.” Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10, 567 (2023). Link
Dr. Tony Mitchell earned a doctorate in Science Education with an emphasis on chemical education from the University of Iowa in 1990. He also earned a B. S. in chemistry from Truman State University (1971) and a M. Ed. from the University of Missouri – Columbia (1975). He served as a lay speaker and lay minister in the United Methodist Church for some twenty years. He continues to look at the how science and faith intersect and interact. His thoughts on both areas can be found on his blog, “Thoughts from The Heart On The Left.”