èƵ

Sponsored by

Google’s research chief: The power of big data

Take a mind-bogglingly huge quantity of data and apply some simple statistics: that's Peter Norvig's strategy for changing the way we live

Data junkie Data junkie

This article isusually available only tosubscribers but is being made free to view thanks to sponsorship fromOcado

Take a mind-bogglingly huge quantity of data and apply some simple statistics: that’s Peter Norvig‘s strategy for changing the way we live

PETER NORVIG doesn’t suffer fools gladly. Nor bureaucracy. Nor journalists who fail to check their facts. This much is clear from browsing . Among papers on artificial intelligence nestle idiosyncratic essays such as the scathing , plus , brought to you by a Bern patent office that has somehow travelled through time to purchase a modern human resources handbook.

Norvig is also a world leader in computer science, who prior to joining Google a decade ago headed what is now the at NASA’s Ames Research Center, developing software to allow robotic spacecraft to operate autonomously. So as I drive down the San Francisco peninsula to our meeting at Google HQ, a stone’s throw from Ames in Mountain View, it is with both anticipation and trepidation. At least he has a sense of humour, I tell myself.

That Norvig has a compelling vision becomes clear when he launches into an overview of Google’s research. His big idea is that if you can amass sufficient data, a few relatively simple statistical algorithms are enough to solve some of the most vexing problems in machine learning, such as automated language translation. “In the past most people said, ‘We’ll stop when we hit the bounds of what can fit into the memory of one computer’,” Norvig says. “Whereas we said, ‘We’ll stop when we fill up a data centre’.”

The business world is full of analysts touting the power of “big data”. Much of it is arm waving, but at is “to organize the world’s information”, Norvig is confident that he has found the real deal. This, he argues, is why Google can instantaneously translate web pages between dozens of languages; why it is leading the way in visual search; and why one day you may talk to machines in colloquial, heavily accented speech and have them understand you, first time.

are the most mature product of this approach. “In the past, people had thought of this as being a linguistics problem,” says Norvig, which meant designing software that could replicate a human translator’s understanding of the languages involved, including their grammatical rules.

Instead, Norvig’s team has compiled texts that have already been translated, and applies statistical techniques to train the system to learn translations of unfamiliar words and how they are used in context. “Essentially we are just building this big model of probabilities,” Norvig says.

He explains the principle by recalling a visit to Berlin: “There’s a brochure in my hotel, and the left side is in English and the right side is in German. If anybody asked how to say, ‘To dial the operator press zero,’ I would know how to translate that. I don’t have to understand anything.” Through this approach writ large, Google can now offer acceptably meaningful translations between more than 50 languages.

The same concept of applying simple statistical rules to vast quantities of data underpins the two other main thrusts of Google’s research: in visual search and speech recognition. Run through enough pictures tagged as the Eiffel Tower, Norvig says, and you don’t need massively complex algorithms for computers to learn that the tower is the pointy thing.

This will allow more powerful ways of linking real-world queries to Google’s familiar search capabilities, using mobile devices. “If you’re in a store and you want information on a product you could type in its name, but just taking a picture seems easier,” says Norvig. Through , smartphone users can already search for information on some objects, such as landmarks or bottles of wine, by snapping them with the device’s camera.

Speech recognition is a tougher nut to crack. Because of the almost infinite variety in accent, timbre and other characteristics of human speech, the conventional approach has been to train systems to learn individual users’ vocal tics. That’s fine if you want a personal dictation machine, but useless for allowing computers to interpret anything that’s said to them, by anyone.

Norvig is convinced that speech recognition will fall to the “big data, simple algorithms” approach. The problem is finding enough data, as the spoken word is not represented online as comprehensively as text and images. As we discuss this issue, Norvig makes a revealing admission about the launch of , which among other things transcribes phone messages and sends them to your email inbox: “One of the reasons we had this phone service is that we wanted to capture lots of interactions; hear different accents and different voices saying different things.”

No human is listening to your messages. Norvig simply means that computers are using the data to improve their ability to transcribe speech. But it’s this type of routine processing of personal information that makes some people uneasy about Google’s reach into our lives – and helps explain the company’s clashes with campaigners for online privacy.

Google Voice also illustrates a crucial difference in culture between Google and Norvig’s last employer. In the early days of the service, some commentators – èƵ included – had fun at Google’s expense, noting the gibberish in some of the transcribed emails. Though things have improved since then, the transcriptions are still far from perfect, as Norvig admits. The company is relaxed about letting rudimentary versions of its products loose on customers, he says, because that helps gather more data and solicits feedback on what people want to see improved.

Such an approach could never be tolerated by NASA, where a single glitch can mean the loss of a mission. “You can’t send out a repairman,” Norvig observes. So despite excellent results with the experimental Deep Space 1 mission to comet Borrelly, which tested a range of advanced technologies, NASA decided not to use on-board control software designed by Norvig’s team to give the Spirit and Opportunity autonomous control over their movements. Norvig well understands NASA’s caution, not least because of his experience investigating the failure of the Mars Climate Orbiter: the probe burned up in the planet’s atmosphere in 1999 because of confusion between imperial and metric units in the navigation software.

The inquiry also triggered in Norvig a visceral reaction to “bullshit” PowerPoint presentations, as officials addressed the investigating panel with slick but unilluminating slide shows. A few months later, Norvig created the ““, a satire on the propensity for presentation software to blunt rhetoric and obscure meaning – especially if the presenter follows suggestions made by PowerPoint’s autocontent wizard.

Norvig realised it was time to leave NASA. “The excitement had begun to wear off, and the dulling effect of bureaucracy never wears off,” he says. Looking at the relaxed figure before me, it’s clear Norvig has found his spiritual home. “Please don’t offer me a job. I already have the best job in the world,” his website tells headhunters.

“Please don’t offer me a job. I already have the best job in the world”

Does he worry about all those bright young things at Google who may want that job for themselves? Norvig says he wouldn’t mind if someone else took his position – just as long as he’s still allowed to play with Google’s oodles of data. “The best part is being here,” he says.

Profile

has a PhD in computer science from the University of California, Berkeley. After starting up the academic ladder he moved into industry, first with Sun Microsystems and later with database startup Junglee. After three years heading the Computational Sciences Division at NASA’s Ames Research Center, he joined Google in 2001, initially as director of machine learning