A timely reminder that AI is not a panacea nor necessarily a path to a good return on investment.
As always, the licensing costs are rarely the major cost e.g. accessing and preparing the necessary data is a mountain to climb.
IBM Watson claimed early PR successes but this "WIRED" article questions its ability to stay ahead of the AI and machine learning pack chasing it.
I analysed this in "IBM Watson versus Holme".
The supercomputer is also very "picky" about the data that’s fed into it, with a large amount of preparation and human hand-holding needed. The report cites the case of University of Texas cancer research centre MD Anderson which began working with Watson to assist matching cancer patients to clinical trials. Though initial results were positive, a scathing report from university auditors later explained that the project had been put on hold after it blazed though more than $62 million (£47.6 million) without reaching its goals. There was no suggestion that IBM’s software was at fault, it highlighted the potential pitfalls and immense costs of actually using it.
