What is “Real” AI?

Clients ask me this all the time.  They want to know if a proposed new system has the real stuff, or if it’s snake oil.  It’s a tough question, because the answer is complicated.  Even if I dictate some challenge questions, their discussion with the sales rep is likely to be inconclusive.

The bottom line is that we want to use historical data to make predictions.  Here are some things we might want to predict:

  • Is this customer going to buy a car today? (Yes/No)
  • Which protection product is he going to buy? (Choice)
  • What will be my loss ratio? (Number)

In Predictive Selling for F&I, I discussed some ways to predict product sales.  The classic example is to look at LTV and predict whether the customer will want GAP.  High LTV, more likely.  Low LTV, less likely.  With historical data and a little math, you can write a formula to determine the GAP-sale probability.

What is predictive analytics?

If you’re using statistics and one variable, that’s not AI, but it is a handy predictive model just the same.  What if you’re using a bunch of variables, as with linear regression?  Regression is powerful, but it is still an analytical method.

The technical meaning of analytical is that you can solve the problem directly using math, instead of another approach like iteration or heuristics.  Back when I was designing “payment rollback” for MenuVantage, I proved it was possible to algebraically reverse our payment formulas – possible, but not practical.  It made more sense to run the calculations forward, and use iteration to solve the problem.

You can do simple linear regression on a calculator.  In fact, they made us do this in business school.  If you don’t believe me – HP prints the formulas on the back of their HP-12 calculator.  So, while you can make a damned good predictive model using linear regression, it’s still not AI.  It’s predictive analytics.

By the way, “analytics” is a singular noun, like “physics.”  No one ever says “physics are fun.”  Take that, spellcheck!

What is machine learning?

The distinctive feature of Machine Learning is that the system generates a predictive model that is not reachable through analysis.  It will trundle through your historical data using iteration to determine, say, the factor weights in a neural network, or the split values in a decision tree.

“Machine learning is the field of study that gives computers the ability to learn without being explicitly programmed.”

The model improves with exposure to more data (and tuning) hence Machine Learning.  This is very powerful, and will serve for a working definition of “real” AI.

AI is an umbrella term that includes Machine Learning but also algorithms, like expert systems, that don’t learn from experience.  Analytics includes statistical methods that may make good predictions, but these also do not learn.  There is nothing wrong with these techniques.

Here are some challenge questions:

  • What does your model predict?
  • What variables does it use?
  • What is the predictive model?
  • How accurate is it?

A funny thing I learned reading forums like KD Nuggets is that kids today learn neural nets first, and then they learn about linear regression as the special case that can be solved analytically.

What is a neural network?

Yes, the theory is based on how neurons behave in the brain.  Image recognition, in particular, owes a lot to the dorsal pathway of the visual cortex.  Researchers take this very seriously, and continue to draw inspiration from the brain.  So, this is great if your client happens to be a neuroscientist.

My client is more likely to be a technology leader, so I will explain neural nets by analogy with linear regression.  Linear regression takes a bunch of “X” variables and establishes a linear relationship among them, to predict the value of a single dependent “Y” variable.  Schematically, that looks like this:

Now suppose that instead of one linear equation, you use regression to predict eight intermediate “Z” variables, and then feed those into another linear model that predicts the original “Y.” Every link in the network has a factor weight, just as in linear regression.

Apart from some finer points (like nonlinear activation functions) you can think of a neural net as a stack of interlaced regression models.

You may recall that linear regression works by using partial derivatives to find the minimum of an error function parametrized by the regression coefficients.  Well, that’s exactly what the neural network training process does!

What is deep learning?

This brings us to one final buzzword, Deep Learning.  The more layers in the stack, the smarter the neural net.  There’s no danger of overdoing it, because the model will learn to skip redundant layers.  The popular image recognition model, ResNet152 has – you guessed it – 152 layers.

So, it’s deep.  It also sounds cool, as if the model is learning “deeply” which, technically, I suppose it is.  This is not relevant for our purposes, so ignore it unless it affects accuracy.

Digital Retail Consolidation

There has been a wave of buyouts and tie-ups lately, and so it is time to reexamine the competitive landscape.  We start by fleshing out the model I described in DR and Dealer Websites.  This is a commerce-oriented model, placing software products along the customer journey.

Looking at the three big DMS vendors, we see Roadster and Gubagoo filling important gaps for CDK and Reynolds.  Cox has long been in this space, now with Accelerate, and MMD before that.  Cox is the only one of this group to own a listing platform, Autotrader.

Last year, CDK sold its dealer marketing operation to Ansira, including the dealer site business formerly known as Cobalt.  The new entity, Sincro, now has a tie-up with Tekion.  As far as I know, this is indeed the first real-time interface from website to DMS.  I have worked with clients on other DMS interfaces, but none that cross the Buy Now boundary.

In the dealership, I list only the DMS, although the model could be extended to break out other point-of-sale systems.  Note that CDK and Dealertrack no longer have their own menu systems.  Both are now offering Darwin under license.  To round out the DR theme, I include TrueCar’s tie up with AutoFi, and Fox Dealer’s acquisition of TagRail.

So far, so typical.  Everybody wants a DR partner, and the big vendors have always acquired the innovative upstarts.  But now, we discover a new theme. CDK paid a lot of money for Roadster, $360 million, to plug a gap in its product line.  Why did J.D. Power, not a software vendor, pay even more for Darwin?

Digital Retail Acquisitions are Big Data Plays

J.D. Power is primarily a data business.  They own ALG and Autodata.  According to the press release, they are “focused on maximizing the value of our extensive data and analytics assets.”  Darwin, through its powerful DMS interface, has been reading and analyzing sales data for thousands of dealers.

MotoInsight, the Canadian DR company (my profile here) was recently acquired by a unit of Thoma Bravo, which in turn owns J.D. Power.  Seeing a pattern yet?  The Autodata merger is pretty recent, and also mentions analytics.

“In working with Modal, we are leveraging aggregated purchase data and AI to improve conversion.”

Another DR player, Modal, recently teamed up with a data science company called Inmar.  I couldn’t find the commercial terms, but founder Aaron Krane has stepped back.  There’s a new CEO, and a plan to “catapult analytics to the forefront.”

The press release for the recent acquisition of Dealer Socket by Solera, “the preeminent global data intelligence and technology leader” specifically mentions machine learning.  While we’re at it, let’s note that Automotive Mastermind is a unit of IHS Markit, as are Carfax and R.L Polk.

You’ve probably heard that “data is the new oil.” Opinions vary, but I think the metaphor holds up here.  If you study analytics the way I do, it’s easy to see the data resources underlying these transactions.  You can also check out this book, or the usual sources like HBR and Sloan.

Digital Retail is “the engine,” giving customers a self-sufficient buying experience.  This engine is amenable to endless AI-based use cases, from recommenders to NLP chatbots … and AI runs on data.

Car Search Aggregation

I was rereading Professor Rogers’ book and I had this brainstorm that somebody should develop an aggregator site to sit on top of digitally-enabled car dealers, the way Kayak does for airlines.  It could scrape all the listings into one vehicle-search page, aided perhaps by a standardized listing API. 

It turns out I am not the first one to have this idea, but the research was interesting.

First, we have to make a distinction between providing a lead and selling the car.  This is not always easy, because few customers require full digital retail, and most lead providers have some limited DR capability.  Still, this distinction is important to an aggregator:

To make said distinction, imagine the dealer in this diagram has a DR system and also uses a third-party classified site.  If you are a DR skeptic, imagine this is Carvana (or CarMax) with their own integrated car-selling site. 

I am using a thin line for leads and a thick line for deals.  This notation helps to show that the Kayak site should only connect to DR-capable dealers.  Otherwise, it’s lead provider on top of lead provider, with no added value.

Once a platform is widely established in its category, it is extremely hard to launch a direct challenger with a similar service – David Rogers

Here, I am just doing what any good futurist does – working backward from the goal state.  What the market wants is a single place to shop, like Amazon.  Rogers would call this a “platform,” and network effects says it’s a winner-take-all business.  There can be only one. 

Once you recognize this three-layer model, you can infer all sorts of fun things.  Like, suppose Carvana (or CarMax) decided to open up their DR capability to other dealers.  These would be certified and operationally compatible dealers, whose inventory Carvana could sell for a commission.  I’ll leave it to you to negotiate who earns the F&I gross:

I have been writing about digital retail for a few years now, speculating on how the goal state would be achieved.  Note that “DR aggregation” on the left side of the diagram, and “platform aggregation” on the right, correspond to the two vectors I described here.  

I have long advocated platform sites adding DR capability, as some are doing now.  This brings us to an interesting piece of history.  Airline booking sites Orbitz and Kayak were founded by the same guy, Steve Hafner, in that order:

Initially, Hafner undertook what we would call the DR piece, while Kayak opted to be simply an aggregated lead provider.  I still think it’s a good idea for listing sites to develop DR features, but history suggests the TrueCar approach – linking up with Roadster – is the correct one.

The Robotaxi Myth

I started following the Waymo situation a few weeks ago, when Ars Technica asked “why hasn’t Waymo expanded its driverless taxi service?” My glib reply on Twitter was that ride hailing is not a good use case.  Since then, we have learned that the recently-departed executive team had not been moving fast enough to satisfy their investors.  First to go was the Chief Safety Officer – not a good sign.

Indeed, the robotaxi is the absolute worst use case, according to this very thorough analysis by Tim Lee.  Lee’s recommendation is to put autonomous cars on the road, now, doing something they can actually do, and proceed from there.

Lyft has just bailed out, as Uber did last year.  The New Republic calls self-driving cars “a series of very expensive and glitzy pilot projects” which, while unkind, is pretty accurate.  Level 5 automation will be in the pilot stage for a long time.  We (and Alphabet) should temper our expectations.

Good use cases for self-driving exist in SAE level 4, constrained conditions – like airport shuttles, food delivery, and taxi services in closed communities.  Shuttle services like this are popping up all around the country. 

A zero-to 25-mph self-driving car—we believe that problem is very, very solvable.

This quote from Voyage founder Oliver Cameron sums it up – and vindicates Waymo’s decision to hunker down in Chandler, Arizona.  I agree with Lee that the winners will be those companies that are able to commercialize level 4.

Who asked for self-driving cars, anyway?  Certainly not consumers.  This study from MIT, Consumers Don’t Really Want Self-Driving Cars, and this more recent one from AAA found the same result.  Nearly half of respondents said they would never purchase a car that completely drives itself. 

They’re looking for driver assistance systems that work to help them stay in active and safe control of the vehicle.

What do they want?  You guessed it: automatic emergency braking, lane keeping, and blind spot warning.  These features come under the heading of SAE level 2, also known as Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS). 

Several people have come to grief from thinking that their level 2 vehicles were “full self-driving.”  Ironically, the better the system, the greater the false sense of security, says AAA’s Greg Brannon.  This is a shame because the robotaxi myth prevents us from properly appreciating level 2. 

List of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS)

  • Adaptive Cruise Control
  • Anti-lock Braking System
  • Automatic Emergency Braking
  • Blind Spot Detection
  • Dynamic Brake Support        
  • Electronic Stability Control
  • Forward Collision Warning
  • Lane Departure Warning      
  • Lane Keeping Support
  • Parking Assist           
  • Rear Cross Traffic Alert
  • Rear Visibility System

Proponents say that replacing human drivers will save lives, but ADAS is already doing that. It’s also, as I wrote here, adding value to new vehicles.  I suspect that, just as the technology must work its way up from level 2, so must we drivers.  As we become more accustomed to ADAS features, we will be better prepared to supervise semi-autonomous (level 3) vehicles.