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