Home  |  About Journal  |  Editorial Board  |  For Authors  |  For Referees  |  For Readers  |  Subscription  |  Contract Us
International Journal of Automation and Computing 2018, Vol. 15 Issue (5) :637-642    DOI: 10.1007/s11633-018-1127-x
Perspective Current Issue | Next Issue | Archive | Adv Search << Previous Articles | >>
Expert and Non-expert Opinion About Technological Unemployment
Toby Walsh1,2,3
1. University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia;
2. Data61, Locked Bag 6016, UNSW, Kensington, Sydney, Australia;
3. Technical University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Download: [PDF 803KB] HTML()   Export: BibTeX or EndNote (RIS)      Supporting Info
Abstract There is significant concern that technological advances, especially in robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), could lead to high levels of unemployment in the coming decades. Studies have estimated that around half of all current jobs are at risk of automation. To look into this issue in more depth, we surveyed experts in robotics and AI about the risk, and compared their views with those of non-experts. Whilst the experts predicted a significant number of occupations were at risk of automation in the next two decades, they were more cautious than people outside the field in predicting occupations at risk. Their predictions were consistent with their estimates for when computers might be expected to reach human level performance across a wide range of skills. These estimates were typically decades later than those of the non-experts. Technological barriers may therefore provide society with more time to prepare for an automated future than the public fear. In addition, public expectations may need to be dampened about the speed of progress to be expected in robotics and AI.
Email this article
Add to my bookshelf
Add to citation manager
Email Alert
Articles by authors
KeywordsSurvey   technological unemployment   artificial intelligence (AI)     
Received: 2017-09-23; published: 2017-09-23
Corresponding Authors: Toby Walsh     Email: tw@cse.unsw.edu.au
About author: Toby Walsh has won the Humboldt Research Award and the NSW Premier's Prize for Excellence in Engineering and ICT. E-mail:tw@cse.unsw.edu.au (Corresponding author)ORCID iD:0000-0003-2998-8668
Cite this article:   
Toby Walsh. Expert and Non-expert Opinion About Technological Unemployment[J]. International Journal of Automation and Computing , vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 637-642, 2018.
http://www.ijac.net/EN/10.1007/s11633-018-1127-x      或     http://www.ijac.net/EN/Y2018/V15/I5/637
[1] T. Poggio, H. Mhaskar, L. Rosasco, B. Miranda, Q. L. Liao. Why and when can deep-but not shallow-networks avoid the curse of dimensionality: A review. International Journal of Automation and Computing, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 503-519, 2017. DOI: 10.1007/s11633-017-1054-2
[2] The World Economic Forum. The Future of jobs: Employment, skills and workforce strategy for the fourth industrial revolution. Global Challenge Insight Report, The World Economic Forum, 2016.
[3] J. M. Keynes. Economic possibilities for our grandchildren. Essays in Persuasion, J. M. Keynes Ed., New York, USA: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 321-332, 1932.
[4] C. B. Frey, M. A. Osborne, The Future of Employment: How Susceptible are Jobs to Computerisation? Oxford, UK: University Martin School, 2013.
[5] H. Durrant-Whyte, L. McCalman, S. O'Callaghan, A. Reid, D. Steinberg. The impact of computerisation and automation on future employment. Australia's Future Workforce? Chapter 1.4.
[6] C. B. Frey, M. A. Osborne, C. Holmes, E. Rahbari, E. Curmi, R. Garlick, J. Chua, G. Friedlander, P. Chalif, G. McDonald, M. Wilkie. Technology at work v2.0: The future is not what it used to be. Oxford University Martin School, UK, 2016.
[7] V. C. Müller, N. Bostrom. Future progress in artificial intelligence: A survey of expert opinion. Fundamental Issues of Artificial Intelligence, V. C. Müller, Ed., Berlin, Germany: Springer, pp. 555-572, 2014. Fundamental Issues of Artificial Intelligence, V. C. M target="_blank">
[8] Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, G. Hinton. Deep learning. Nature, vol. 521, no. 7553, pp. 436-444, 2015. DOI: 10.1038/nature14539
[9] D. Silver, A. Huang, C. J. Maddison, A. Guez, L. Sifre, G. van den Driessche, J. Schrittwieser, I. Antonoglou, V. Panneershelvam, M. Lanctot, S. Dieleman, D. Grewe, J. Nham, N. Kalchbrenner, I. Sutskever, T. Lillicrap, M. Leach, K. Kavukcuoglu, T. Graepel, D. Hassabis. Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature, vol. 529, no. 7587, pp. 484-489, 2016. DOI: 10.1038/nature16961
[10] T. A. Patel, M. Puppala, R. O. Ogunti, J. E. Ensor, T. C. He, J. B. Shewale, D. P. Ankerst, V. G. Kaklamani, A. A. Rodriguez, S. T. C. Wong, J. C. Chang. Correlating mammographic and pathologic findings in clinical decision support using natural language processing and data mining methods. Cancer, vol. 123, no. 1, pp. 114-121, 2017. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.v123.1
[11] O. Etzioni. No, the experts don't think super intelligent AI is a threat to humanity. MIT Technology Review, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Ed., Cambridge, MA, USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2016.
[12] J. Hendler. Avoiding another AI winter. IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 2-4, 2008. DOI: 10.1109/MIS.2008.20
Copyright 2010 by International Journal of Automation and Computing