Caution to newbies and A.I.

[44 AMP]

I am somewhat confused. When I think of AI, I think of the systems imagined in the old days of sci-fi, a program that was "intelligent" in the sense that it could learn and incorporate what it learned into its operations to perform them more effectively or efficiently.

It seems like what is being called AI here is just an extensive search engine, that "intelligently" decides what data it finds to present to you.

Does it, (Can it??) evaluate the data it sees for anything other than how well it answers your search criteria??

Seems to me that if that is what it does, its still a matter of human experience and judgement to determine if the data presented is both accurate, and meets the search parameters.

[Unclenick]

That's because human experience is what gives context to the question and answer alike.

That said, there seem to be a couple of kinds of AI floating around. I saw that some experimenters in one of the big software firms decided to try forming an Internet business, and the AI coded their app software for them to their specifications...in seven minutes. So all the people going to coding boot camp need to watch out. But you probably have to know how to talk to it to get that to happen.


Marco,

My only point is that the table's creation was driven by data (their pressure measurements). Not that loads can be directly deduced from the results. I agree that AI is a roll of the dice where data is concerned. At least with the chart, you know who published it. With AI you have no idea where it's information came from (other than, "it's on the Internet").

[Wag]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

It seems like what is being called AI here is just an extensive search engine, that "intelligently" decides what data it finds to present to you.

That's exactly what it is. It's just very very fast.

--Wag--

[cdoc42]

Just to emphasize how I started this post so no one misses it:

"Caution to newbies and A.I.
If you are new to reloading, if you research information on Microsoft's "Bing" A.I. (or perhaps any such system), be sure to continue to research that supports what you are told."

Since I am more than a neophyte in this hobby, I poised the question just for the hell of it to see what AI had to offer in this "advanced" encyclopedic collection of intellectual information, precisely because I had encountered errors in medical issues.

I would hope no one entertained the opinion that I somehow suggested it was a suitable source of information.

[totaldla]

An Artificial Intelligence application is software that modifies itself as it learns.

[ballardw]

Originally Posted by totaldla

An Artificial Intelligence application is software that modifies itself as it learns.

But are we sure that it modifies itself for the better? GIGO lives and AI is the latest more complex version.

[Unclenick]

I saw an article stating that AI got far better scores on a math test when it was told to take a deep breath. Interesting stuff. Kind of like prepping for a slow-fire shot.

[hdwhit]

It seems the AI is unaware that burn-rate tables are composed by each manufacturer using their own testing protocol.

There is no industry standard for compiling a burn rate table (i.e. do you burn the powder in the open versus a confined space, etc.?), so any AI assuming the burn rates are comparable are wrong.

[Unclenick]

Actually, there does seem to be an industry-standard method based on firing the same charge weight of all the powders being ranked in the same cartridge with the same bullet up to a speed point. But there is no standard for which cartridge or bullet is to be used nor for where a handoff to a different cartridge and bullet for the faster powders occurs. The ranking differs a little in a different cartridge with a different bullet weight. The relative burn rate ranking is then simply the inverse of the pressure peaks of each powder produced.

They have to do something like that because the relative burn rate is an "as-if" number and not an actual burn rate number. The reason the actual burn rate (the burn rate factor, Ba) doesn't give useful enough information to the shooter is that different powder formulations have different total chemical energy content and different progressivity rates, so the pressure curves don't match and the peak values don't depend in a simple manner on the burn rate alone.

There is a thorough description of an example of a relative burn rate chart developed by Bofors in the 2013 Norma print manual.