Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site deepthot.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!deepthot!julian From: julian@deepthot.UUCP (Julian Davies) Newsgroups: net.ai Subject: Re: computer ECG, FDA testing of AI programs Message-ID: <212@deepthot.UUCP> Date: Fri, 9-Mar-84 11:58:08 EST Article-I.D.: deepthot.212 Posted: Fri Mar 9 11:58:08 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 10-Mar-84 14:22:37 EST References: <17229@sri-arpa.UUCP> Organization: UWO CS, London Canada Lines: 13 As a matter of human engineering, I think "expert" programs for practical use must be prepared to explain the reasoning followed when they present recommendations. Computer people ought to be well aware of the need to provide adequate auditing and verification of program function, even if the naive users don't know this. The last thing we need is 'expert' computers that cannot be questioned. I think Weizenbaum had a valid point when he wrote about programs that noone understood. And I would be unhappy to see further spread of computer systems that the human users cannot feel themselves to be in charge of, especially when the programs are called 'intelligent' and the technology for answering these questions about the reasoning processes is fairly well established. Julian Davies