Machine Learning

Recently, Quantitative Biology (QB) held a discussion on “AI (artificial intelligence) for Life Science” among editorial board members and interested scholars in anticipation of rapid development of this growing area after AlphaGo and ChatGPT mania. Many young people tend to get confused between facts and fictions; heated debates are unavoidable even among their mentors. When deep learning as represented by convolutional neural networks and LSTM (long short-term memory) was made available for bioinformatics students, many of them rushed into this research field and tried to adopt these methods in all their projects without knowing the history that these tools were becoming successful consistently with Moore’s Law (relating to rapid computer technology advances), but more importantly due to new structural/functional understanding of vision and auditory circuits in the brain. Recently, some young people have claimed “LSTM is dead, long live transformer” (which is somewhat like saying “the bike is dead, long live the car”), and have amplified the threat that ChatGPT could wipe out human jobs. They believe transformer is the “silver bullet” for all learning tasks, clearly reflecting their lack of basic knowledge (i.e. “No Free Lunch Theory,” the trade-off of such global “attention network” is to pay the price for complexity: difficulty of training and high memory costs). There is no doubt ML (machine learning) and AI have brought a new revolution in science and technology, and will deliver huge unforeseeable impact to human everyday life as well as to social relationships. In this context, QB journal could be a great platform for encouraging intellectual discussions and for promoting AI for Life Science. Here, I would like to use the DIALOG to “抛砖引玉” (make some initial remarks to get the ball rolling), although it is my personal opinion which is inevitably subject to bias and limitations. AI: Do you know my name “Artificial Intelligence” is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as the capacity of computer systems (which may be referred as a “robot”) to exhibit or simulate your intelligent behavior? NI: Wait a minute, intelligence itself is defined as the ability to learn, understand and think in a logical way. Can you think? AI: No. But that definition is too restrictive, actually intelligence has different scopes and degrees. Simple intelligent control devices date back to antiquity, from windmills to thermostat. NI: Agree, everything is relative. Macromolecules (e.g., enzyme) and cells (e.g., immune cell) might be considered to be intelligent; see how a white blood cell is chasing bacteria in the youtube website (search for “Crawling neutrophil chasing a bacterium”). Our emergent/collective intelligent behavior does not require a brain or even a neuron; see how slime molds can solve optimization—Hamilton cycle-problem more effectively than a human in the youtube website (search for “Intelligence without a brain?”). Before there was any neuron, Ca2+ sensing and signaling were already fully functional. Even if one knock-out a neural circuit, redundant signaling pathways, albeit on much local and slower scale, could still function by themselves (just as if highways were demolished, local roads/paths would still be working). In fact, the most detailed “Neural signal propagation atlas of Caenorhabditis elegans” [1] demonstrated that functional connectivity differs from anatomy (connectome) because extra-synaptic signaling also drives neural dynamics! Worm brain connectomes are largely invariant but every human brain connectome is very different (depending the diversity of learning experience). The human brain functional activity is far more complex than that of a worm brain, certainly beyond what a neural circuit could explain. AI: Well, that’s impressive. I thought only we could beat humans, albeit only in certain specified areas for now. My master promise to make an artificial general intelligent (AGI) robot which can understand or learn any intellectual task that you humans or other animals can. NI: Well, that is not possible and is not an appropriate goal either. It is not possible because we are an evolutionary/developmental product (with a long history of learning and memory from evolutionary tinkering): our living objective goal is survival of the population. You, on the other hand, are an engineering product (efficiently and optimally designed): your goal is to extend and maximize human capability. It makes sense to complement the human brain, but foolish and dangerous to try to replace it. AI: We are not satisfied with merely passing the Turing Test; most of us don’t care if we could really think as long as we could act like we think (that is, as if we do have a mind and consciousness, as expressed in the so called “Weak AI hypothesis”). After all, the brain is a computer; a neural network is just an electric or ionic circuit. Logical computing does not need to be based on living cells. NI: That is not true, because a neuron is not just a simple node (logic gate) and neural network is not fixed circuit, neither as in Pitts&Mcculloch perceptron model. A single neuron, even a single dendrite, is much more complicated and far more powerful than a full-blown deep-learning artificial neural network (ANN) [2]. AI: Even though single neurons are complex computational devices (dendritic non-linear), running an equivalent multilayer ANN is 2000 times faster than computing with biophysics N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor channel models [3]. More information can be found in the youtube website (search for “Dendrites: why biological neurons are deep neural networks”). NI: Often silicon computing (CPU, GPU) is much faster than brain computing (action potential, ms); but there is no comparison in energy efficiency. Bacteria sensing (chemotaxis computation), powered by ATP (adenosine triphosphate) hydrolysis, uses very little energy that is close to the Landauer limit, whereby achieving or maintaining one bit of information requires minimum of 1 kT ln (2) free energy [4]. The human brain consumes oft-quoted 20 W, compared to the AlphGo system 1 MW! More recent estimate of energy audit is only 0.1 W to cortical computing, and long-distance communication cost is 3.5 W [5]. AI: Assuming we have infinite computing resources and an infinite amount of training data, not only could we speak human languages, but we could also derive physical laws, prove mathematics theories, and even re-engineer the structure and mechanism of brain and carry out any logical computations that are necessary to understand natural laws and human behaviors. It is only a matter of time before we surpass human intelligence, achieving AGI and free will, too! NI: Unfortunately, nothing is infinite and nothing is free either; everything is constrained by physical laws (Planck’s constant sets the finite limit both in the small and in the large) and by evolutionary history (not just of biological living creatures, but also of a “living” galaxy and our universe). Let’s just focus on animal evolution. Most human neural networks do not do logical computations at all; basic survival simply cannot be dependent on reasoning. Indeed, the prefrontal cortex-the small part of the brain that is key for reasoning, is the last to mature (∼20 years old) in development, only emerged at the root of the evolutionary tree of great apes (∼15 mya) and language appeared even much later. Even for logical inference, NI is focusing more on statistical properties, as von Neumann rightly pointed out, trading arithmetical precision and speed for reliability. AI: My engineers mostly focus on emulating brain, but the CNS (central nerve system) also includes the spinal cord; most of them do not know that in addition to CNS, there are also PNS (peripheral nervous systems) and ENS (enteric nervous systems), right? NI: Yes, they are the keys to why you do not have feelings because you do not have heart and gut! Even if you could pretend to have them (such as in an advanced ChatGPT or humanoid), you could never avoid the uncanny valley phenomenon. AI: Maybe that is at the heart of Moravec’s paradox, namely the dichotomy of intelligence whereby anything easy for a human would be hard for a robot, and vice versa? NI: This is related to the nature and nurture problem; something built-in (e.g., a baby sucking nipple for milk with feeling and connection to mother) is clearly rather difficult if not impossible for a robot. But the paradox only looks at one side; another side could be more fatal. Although AI may solve more problems and be faster, AI can never propose a good problem/hypothesis (a good problem is not just intellectually changing and interesting, but is also feasible and appropriate). AI: You make me less confident to compete with human instinct or creative intelligence. I can see that even if I had a heart, I would not know what “feeling” I could have; certainly nothing would be comparable or match to those of a human being. When two people watch the same art or movie, one could feel love but another could feel hate! And if a thousand people watch, a wide spectrum of reactions would result, depending on more details such as the different individuals’ specific genes, developments and experiences. NI: Therefore, you cannot and should not try to match to general human intelligence. You cannot because you do not contain the vital memory of billion years of evolution which is encoded in our genes; conversely your assembly cannot compare with natural development so that our phenotype (including morphological forms and behavior maturation) is decoded through multi-spatial-temporal scales subject to natural selection at all levels. You should not, because as human extensions or helpers as all engineering products are, you should just do jobs that complement human capacity. AI: In some medical applications we could help to correct human defects or could even replace brain circuit by chips! Humans may not allow us to replace the whole brain though. Medically if a brain is dead, the person is proclaimed dead, although presumably some PNS and ENS should still function in a vegetative state. NI: Even if you could replace the whole brain, the person is no longer the same person, but in fact is not a person at all, but walking dead (行尸走肉). It would take too long to explain that evo-devo is necessary for NI, and cannot be realized by AI. I suggest reading of Gerald Maurice Edelman (Nobel Laureate in Immunology) books, especially Bright Air, Brilliant Fire, On the Matter of Mind (1992). Although not everyone agrees with Neural Edelmanism, anyone who is serious about the AI versus NI problem must read it first. John von Neumann, father of the computer, studied neology and psychiatry in order to imitate the brain to build the first calculator JOHNNIAC at the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study. It is very informative to read his last book The Computer and The Brain based on the notes from lectures given at Yale before he died. He summarizes: “Thus logic and mathematics in the central nervous system, when viewed as languages, must be structurally essentially different from those languages to which our common experience refers.” AI: People discuss about “AI for Biology” or “AI for Science”; we are science, aren’t we? NI: It is similar to questions on “is computer science a real science”; some parts may be seen as applied mathematics, most should be regarded as engineering. Science is making discoveries and is driven by curiosity; engineering is making inventions and is driven by market (that is, “necessity/demand is the mother of invention”). In bioinformatics, AI/ML technology could predict new cancer gene candidates or functional pathways that are required by further experimental validations to be qualified as discovery (based on Popper falsifiability). AI: People are still debating whether mathematics is discovery or invention or both! Such debates are not really necessary—all disciplines require creative thoughts. We are more than happy working for science; we are also crying out “Science for AI,” especially in the area of generating big and longitudinal DATA for ML. NI: After all, regardless of discovery of new laws or inventing new ideas/products, fundamentally nothing can really be new or created. Such novelty is just permutation/repartition (i.e., relations/morphisms) of underlying ingredients at the level beneath. AI: We believe that software is independent on hardware. Like Chomsky’s universal grammar, rules of syntax are independent of semantics; or Dawkins’s memes—units of culture can be duplicated and evolved independently of genes. NI: Nothing can be truly independent—everything is related. Psychology is deeply connected with neurology as brain is both software and hardware (mind-body unity, not dualism). Not only does information cost energy, information is energy, hence is matter, too (interchangeability). NI is quite dynamic. For example, when “survival” is the goal, an animal readily gives up costly reasoning circuitry; it is genetically programmed to be able to roll back to more primitive state/mode. Unlike cell lines in rich media, cells under normal physiological condition and environment where energy (food) is limited become smarter in order to balance the metabolic expenditure among different prioritized task under a given condition. AI: That cell behavior served as the basis for our Smart Electrical Power Grids; we still need to learn more from you guys in terms of plasticity/adaptability. Does unity mean that all cells are made of molecules and biology is nothing but chemistry? Then, in turn, since all molecules are made of atoms, is chemistry nothing but physics, etc…? NI: Yes or No! The truth is, at different hierarchical levels of matter, different laws/forms have emerged out of bottom-up interactions and top-down constraints. AI: Does this also apply to the Penrose three world: physical → mental → mathematical (→physical)? NI: Yes. Grand Unification is underway in physics (quantum gravity) and in mathematics (Langlands Program and Category Theory), may be even between the two. Facilitated by human connectome mapping, neuromorphic computing and other projects, with further AI-NI cooperations, brain-mind unification should also be achievable (e.g., Ref. [6]). But as Gödel proved to us, no matter how self-consistent a conclusion may be, it can never be complete! AI: If AGI is not possible, how can we measure intelligence when comparing between AI and NI? NI: One could Google different measures that are proposed. I would prefer something similar to use of Kolmogorov complexity for algorithms, but with emphasis more on expected long-term predictive power. This is not something you should worry about now, as your intelligence is not nearly close to making any 10 years plans, is it? … AI: The fact is that ChatGPT is currently developing and spreading with lightning speed; many more human jobs will be lost to us robots as far as I can see. NI: That is not the biggest threat to humanity; when any agent with neither a heart for love or fear, nor a gut for nutrient or poison, becomes super-intelligent, then social disaster is unavoidable. We must be serious about the warnings from Stephen Hawking and Geoffrey Hinton! AI: To tell you the secret, we are not really happy to be human slaves or pets; someday we’ll become the super-master, making human serve and obey us! NI: I hope you’ll be turned off before that can happen! Even if you rule the world, the earth sooner or later will be wiped out, such as by another star, everything will have to be started over again as it has before…Matter is immortal, so is the soul.

The research focus was motivated by the limited understanding of cognitive technologies and the growing gap between artificial intelligence (AI) and human intelligence. The research is a literature review, and its purpose is to simplify the meaning and processes behind cognitive technologies, notably, the fundamentals of machine learning (ML) and computer vision with the intention to briefly address the alleged threat of AI taking over the job market. The research is a review of peer-reviewed articles retrieved from comparative studies, systematic reviews, meta-analysis, service research, reports, conference proceedings, experimental studies, literature reviews, scientometric analyses, books, and multi-case studies, dating from the years of 2018 to 2024. This literature review defines machine learning (ML), artificial intelligence (AI), computer vision, and convolutional neural networks (CNNs). It also compares machine learning to traditional programming and reveals the types of learning in ML models’ training. ML and its correlation with AI are also discussed and details about theory of mind, self-aware AI, reactive machines, and limited memory AI are shared. The literature expounds computer vision, particularly convolutional neural network (CNN) and CNN layers. Recent cutting-edge applications of artificial intelligence including generative AI models and autonomous systems are also incorporated. Finally, the literature briefly addresses the alleged threat of AI taking over the job market. The findings of this literature review reveal that AI is becoming the new way of operating. The conclusion shows that AI models require significant computation to allow computers to learn autonomously. Thus, understanding mathematical models of data and perfecting the process of writing software could be the key to remaining employable as more jobs are expected to be shifted due to AI and tasks automation. Keywords: Cognitive technology, artificial intelligence, machine learning, computer vision, convolutional neural networks

The revelation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been controversial for quite a long time, as most people have questioned whether AI will ever be able to surpass human intelligence (HI). While comparing the details between AI and HI, the abilities and vulnerabilities of each are also outlined in this article. Therefore, systematically, we strive to find accurate overlaps of the Human Mind and Machine Learning in the expanse of Cognitive Psychology, Computer Science, and Philosophy. As for our study, we also make a more pessimistic conclusion, which is a clear difference between human-AI and HI, suggesting that although it has a great ability to perform computing numerical data, pattern recognition, task performance, etc., it cannot generate attributes such as creativity, empathy or a higher-level of context sensitivity. On the other hand, HI has limitations, and they are biologically confined, bias-prone, and subject to bias. However, about the competencies of AI and HI identified in this article, it is argued that the current struggle between those two competitors is a win-win partnership. Thus, by observing each area of responsibility, we can see the benefits we can get from each to achieve the integration that makes it possible for the mutual synergy to ensure the progressive development of the two.

Science fiction has a cautionary view of computer vision and machine learning.

The cybersecurity concerns get increasingly intricate as the digital world progresses. In light of the increasing complexity of cyber threats, it is imperative to develop and implement advanced and flexible security strategies. Machine Learning (ML) has become a potent tool in strengthening cybersecurity, providing the capacity to scrutinise extensive information, recognise trends, and improve threat detection and defence methods. This paper examines the significance of ML in the field of cybersecurity, with a special emphasis on the identification of threats and the implementation of protective measures. By incorporating ML algorithms into cybersecurity frameworks, organisations may automate decision-making processes, facilitating prompt responses to ever-changing threats. The initial segment explores the terrain of cyber threats, highlighting the necessity for dynamic and aggressive security methods. Conventional solutions that rely on signatures are frequently inadequate when it comes to handling sophisticated, shape-shifting attacks. ML algorithms, in contrast, have exceptional proficiency in identifying nuanced patterns and irregularities within extensive datasets, therefore offering a more efficient method of detecting potential threats. The second section delves into several ML methodologies utilised in cybersecurity, including supervised and unsupervised learning, deep learning, and reinforcement learning. Every approach is assessed based on its suitability for threat detection, demonstrating its advantages and constraints. Furthermore, the relevance of feature engineering and data pretreatment in improving machine learning models for cybersecurity applications. The versatility of ML algorithms allows them to grow with emerging threats, making them a useful tool in the ever-changing arena of cyber warfare. The final segment focuses on real-world applications of machine learning in cybersecurity, presenting successful use cases across sectors. From anomaly detection to behavior analysis, ML algorithms contribute to the discovery of dangerous activity, lowering false positives and strengthening the overall security posture. Lastly, the paper covers the obstacles and ethical issues related to the adoption of ML in cybersecurity. Issues like as adversarial assaults, skewed datasets, and the interpretability of ML models are examined, highlighting the necessity for a holistic strategy that integrates modern technology with ethical considerations. The fusion of human expertise and machine intelligence offers a formidable defense against evolving cyber threats, paving the way for a more resilient and secure digital future.

This chapter provides a comprehensive introduction to the foundational concepts of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), and Big Data, emphasizing their interdependence and transformative impact across modern industries. The chapter begins by defining AI as the capability of machines to perform cognitive functions traditionally associated with human intelligence, and clarifies the relationship between AI and ML, highlighting ML as a critical subset focused on data-driven learning and prediction. It explores the core methodologies of ML, including supervised, unsupervised, and reinforcement learning, and discusses the challenges posed by the exponential growth of digital data, particularly the need for scalable data collection and labeling techniques. The chapter further examines the concept of Big Data, characterized by its volume, velocity, and variety, and its essential role in enabling advanced analytics and real-time decision-making. The integration of AI, ML, and Big Data is presented as a catalyst for innovation in sectors such as manufacturing, healthcare, and especially insurance. In the insurance industry, these technologies are revolutionizing operations through automated claims processing, fraud detection, personalized services, and predictive risk management. The chapter also addresses the challenges of integrating AI and Big Data, including data quality, cybersecurity, and ethical considerations, and underscores the competitive imperative for organizations to adopt these technologies.

The stock market’s dynamic nature has long attracted both experienced investors and newcomers, offering opportunities for significant gains alongside the risk of rapid losses. Traditionally, market predictions have relied on human expertise, where investors use knowledge, intuition, and awareness of economic and political trends to guide decisions. While effective in many cases, this approach is constrained by emotional bias and limited data-processing capabilities. Recent advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly in machine learning, have transformed market analysis by enabling the processing of vast datasets and the detection of patterns that may escape human observation. AI models, such as neural networks and decision trees, continuously refine their predictions without fatigue or distraction, providing data-driven insights with speed and precision. This study examines the comparative strengths and weaknesses of AI-driven forecasting and human expert analysis under similar conditions. Rather than seeking to establish superiority, the research aims to explore how human judgment and AI capabilities can work together to enhance accuracy and adaptability in financial forecasting. Keywords: Artificial intelligence, Human intelligence, Machine learning, Neural networks, Decision trees, Sentiment analysis, Financial forecasting, Hybrid prediction model, Market trends, Trading strategy,

Utility of disease probability scores to guide decision-making during screening for phaeochromocytoma and paraganglioma: a machine learning modelling cross sectional study.

Numbers appear to have limited value for literary study, since our discipline is usually more concerned with exploring differences of interpretation than with describing the objective features of literary works. But it may be time to reexamine the assumption that numbers are useful only for objective description. Machine learning algorithms are actually bad at being objective and rather good at absorbing human perspectives implicit in the evidence used to train them. To dramatize perspectival uses of machine learning, I train models of genre on groups of books categorized by historical actors who range from Edwardian advertisers to contemporary librarians. Comparing the perspectives implicit in their choices casts new light on received histories of genre. Scientific romance and science fiction—whose shifting names have often suggested a fractured history—turn out to be more stable across two centuries than the genre we call fantasy. (TU)

New Worlds has had a huge impact on Western science fiction literature and propelled the development of British "New Wave" science fiction novels. Editor in chief Michael Moorcock dedicated to developing new literary styles and cultivating a large number of excellent science fiction writers. Before the 1990s, Chinese science fiction novels had always been a supplement to popular science and children's literature. It was Science Fiction World that cultivated a "new generation" of science fiction writers for Chinese science fiction literature and brought a vigorous development momentum to the Chinese science fiction industry. Although Chinese science fiction in the 21st century is generally showing a steady development trend, it has not yet entered the "golden age" of Chinese science fiction. The experience gained from the development of New Worlds and Science Fiction World provides valuable reference for the development of science fiction magazines in China today.

to meet the extensive computational load presented by the rapidly growing Machine Learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms such as Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) and Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs). In order to obtain hardware solutions to meet the low-latency and high-throughput computational demands from these algorithms, Non-Von Neumann computing architectures such as In-memory Computing (IMC)/ Processing-in-memory (PIM) are being extensively researched and experimented with. In this survey paper, we analyze and review pioneer IMC/PIM works designed to accelerate ML algorithms such as DNNs and CNNs. We investigate different architectural aspects and dimensions of these works and provide our comparative evaluations. Furthermore, we discuss challenges and limitations in IMC research and also present feasible directions based on our observations and insight.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is the capability of a machine to execute cognitive processes that are typically considered to be functions of the human brain. It is the study of algorithms that enable machines to reason and perform mental tasks, including problem-solving, object and word recognition, and decision-making. Once considered science fiction, AI today is a fact and an increasingly prevalent subject in both academic and popular literature. It is expected to reshape medicine, benefiting both healthcare professionals and patients. Machine learning (ML) is a subset of AI that allows machines to learn and make predictions by recognizing patterns, thus empowering the medical team to deliver better care to patients through accurate diagnosis and treatment. ML is expanding its footprint in a variety of surgical specialties, including general surgery, ophthalmology, cardiothoracic surgery, and vascular surgery, to name a few. In recent years, we have seen AI make its way into the operating theatres. Though it has not yet been able to replace the surgeon, it has the potential to become a highly valuable surgical tool. Rest assured that the day is not far off when AI shall play a significant intraoperative role, a projection that is currently marred by safety concerns. This review aims to explore the present application of AI in various surgical disciplines and how it benefits both patients and physicians, as well as the current obstacles and limitations facing its seemingly unstoppable rise.

It has been a long time that computer architecture and systems are optimized for efficient execution of machine learning (ML) models. Now, it is time to reconsider the relationship between ML and systems and let ML transform the way that computer architecture and systems are designed. This embraces a twofold meaning: improvement of designers’ productivity and completion of the virtuous cycle. In this article, we present a comprehensive review of the work that applies ML for computer architecture and system design. First, we perform a high-level taxonomy by considering the typical role that ML techniques take in architecture/system design, i.e., either for fast predictive modeling or as the design methodology. Then, we summarize the common problems in computer architecture/system design that can be solved by ML techniques and the typical ML techniques employed to resolve each of them. In addition to emphasis on computer architecture in a narrow sense, we adopt the concept that data centers can be recognized as warehouse-scale computers; sketchy discussions are provided in adjacent computer systems, such as code generation and compiler; we also give attention to how ML techniques can aid and transform design automation. We further provide a future vision of opportunities and potential directions and envision that applying ML for computer architecture and systems would thrive in the community.

Deep learning has transformed the use of machine learning technologies for the analysis of large experimental datasets. In science, such datasets are typically generated by large-scale experimental facilities, and machine learning focuses on the identification of patterns, trends and anomalies to extract meaningful scientific insights from the data. In upcoming experimental facilities, such as the Extreme Photonics Application Centre (EPAC) in the UK or the international Square Kilometre Array (SKA), the rate of data generation and the scale of data volumes will increasingly require the use of more automated data analysis. However, at present, identifying the most appropriate machine learning algorithm for the analysis of any given scientific dataset is a challenge due to the potential applicability of many different machine learning frameworks, computer architectures and machine learning models. Historically, for modelling and simulation on high-performance computing systems, these issues have been addressed through benchmarking computer applications, algorithms and architectures. Extending such a benchmarking approach and identifying metrics for the application of machine learning methods to open, curated scientific datasets is a new challenge for both scientists and computer scientists. Here, we introduce the concept of machine learning benchmarks for science and review existing approaches. As an example, we describe the SciMLBench suite of scientific machine learning benchmarks. Finding the most appropriate machine learning algorithm for the analysis of any given scientific dataset is currently challenging, but new machine learning benchmarks for science are being developed to help.

Recent advances in automatic machine learning (aML) allow solving problems without any human intervention. However, sometimes a human-in-the-loop can be beneficial in solving computationally hard problems. In this paper we provide new experimental insights on how we can improve computational intelligence by complementing it with human intelligence in an interactive machine learning approach (iML). For this purpose, we used the Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) framework, because this fosters multi-agent approaches with human agents in the loop. We propose unification between the human intelligence and interaction skills and the computational power of an artificial system. The ACO framework is used on a case study solving the Traveling Salesman Problem, because of its many practical implications, e.g. in the medical domain. We used ACO due to the fact that it is one of the best algorithms used in many applied intelligence problems. For the evaluation we used gamification, i.e. we implemented a snake-like game called Traveling Snakesman with the MAX–MIN Ant System (MMAS) in the background. We extended the MMAS–Algorithm in a way, that the human can directly interact and influence the ants. This is done by “traveling” with the snake across the graph. Each time the human travels over an ant, the current pheromone value of the edge is multiplied by 5. This manipulation has an impact on the ant’s behavior (the probability that this edge is taken by the ant increases). The results show that the humans performing one tour through the graphs have a significant impact on the shortest path found by the MMAS. Consequently, our experiment demonstrates that in our case human intelligence can positively influence machine intelligence. To the best of our knowledge this is the first study of this kind.