Can AI be made trustworthy? Alexa inventor may have the answer
One of the inventors of Amazon's Alexa has proven he can make AI trustworthy — at least when it comes to assessing valid insurance claims.
William Tunstall-Pedoe originally developed the technology that became the retail giant's voice assistant service and his new venture, called UnlikelyAI, has an even more ambitious goal.
'We are tackling a problem that is potentially bigger than Alexa, which is making AI trustworthy,' he said.
His company has combined data-driven learning models, known as neural networks or large language models (LLMs), with rule-based systems, called symbolic reasoning, to create a platform that companies can use to automate their processes using AI.
'LLMs have amazing capabilities and are absolutely transformative but when enterprises try to apply LLMs to problems in their business it very often doesn't work,' said Tunstall-Pedoe, 56. 'A lot of pilots don't really succeed. It is a black box, isn't explainable, and it is inconsistent. We are developing fundamental technologies to tackle that problem.'
UnlikelyAI has completed a pilot with SBS Insurance Services, which saw the insurer automate 40 per cent of its claims handling with 99 per cent accuracy. This compares with a rate of accuracy for the same task that is typically around 52 per cent when just using LLMs, the company said. UnlikelyAI's system also provides an audit trail for all its decisions, so they can be explained if queried by customers or regulators.
'We are building a collection of technologies that bring trust to AI applications. Whenever enterprises are using AI to do business critical things, where the cost of getting it wrong is high, we can help,' said Tunstall-Pedoe.
'In the insurance world we are ingesting the policies, which are natural language. We create a symbolic representation of it, which then gives you that really high accuracy when doing the claims process against it.'
He sold the technology that became a key part of Amazon's Alexa voice assistant in 2012. It originated in a startup he founded in Cambridge called True Knowledge, which became known as Evi after it developed a voice assistant, a few months after Apple launched Siri.
'We were competing directly with the biggest company in the world as a 30-person Cambridge startup. We had millions of downloads very quickly and every big company that was trying to figure out its response to the existence of Siri were talking to us. At the end of 2012 we had two acquisition offers and we chose to get bought by Amazon.'
Tunstall-Pedoe joined the Amazon team to develop Alexa, working on an initiative under the Project D codename, and launching it in the US in 2014. He left Amazon in 2016 and has since invested in over 100 start-ups and mentored entrepreneurs. He founded UnlikelyAI in 2020 and has since raised $20 million from investors including Amadeus Capital Partners, Octopus Ventures, and Cambridge Innovation Capital.
Tunstall-Pedoe said UnlikelyAI's 'goal is to create AI that is always right'.
'When it gives you an answer you can always trust it. It can always provide a fully auditable explanation for any business decision that is made. And it will be consistent, and not breach your trust by giving a different answer each time you use it.'
'Our primary customers are high stakes industries, where a business decision has really big consequences if it's wrong. Medicine is a good example. Finance is also very important, or any industry that is regulated. If you breach regulations you can be fined.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
15 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Angela Rayner says welfare cuts vote will go ahead as Labour rebellion grows
Keir Starmer will push ahead with his plan for a vote on the government's welfare cuts next Tuesday, his deputy said on Wednesday, despite a large and growing rebellion from Labour MPs. Angela Rayner told the Commons the government would not back down on its proposals to cut nearly £5bn from the welfare bill by limiting access to disability payments. With more than 120 Labour MPs now having signed an amendment to put the cuts on hold, ministers are facing a growing possibility of defeat next Tuesday, or of relying on opposition votes to pass the measures. Labour has a majority of 165 MPs in the Commons. But during a session of prime minister's questions during which she was deputising for Starmer, Rayner told MPs the government would not delay or abandon the vote. 'We're investing £1bn into tailored employment support, a right to try to help more people back into work, and ending reassessments for the most severely disabled who will never be able to work,' she said. 'We won't walk away and stand by and abandon millions of people trapped in the failing system left behind by [the shadow chancellor, Mel Stride] and his colleagues.' Pushed by Stride to recommit to a vote on Tuesday, she added: 'I don't know if he listened to what I said … but what I can tell him, and I don't need a script, we will go ahead on Tuesday.' Rayner's message came a day after she and other senior cabinet colleagues mounted a frantic effort to save the bill, calling rebel backbenchers and urging them to vote with the government. Some MPs say they have been threatened with suspension and even de-selection in four years' time if they vote against the bill, while others say party managers have told them they see it as a vote of confidence in the government. Downing Street has denied those claims. The government's lobbying operation had borne little fruit by Wednesday morning, with the number of signatures to the amendment climbing from 108 to 123. They are being led by Meg Hillier, the respected head of the Treasury select committee. The Conservatives appear to have decided not to support the bill. Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, set preconditions for supporting it on Tuesday, none of which are likely to be met. Stride told MPs on Wednesday: 'We will help her [Rayner] to get their bill through, if they can commit to actually reducing the welfare bill and getting people off benefits and into work.' He later added: 'The bill will see the number of people on welfare rising for every single year.' Rayner's insistence that the vote would go ahead echoes the message of the prime minister on Tuesday on his way to the Nato summit in The Hague. 'There is a clear moral case, which is: the current system doesn't help those who want to get into work,' he said. 'It traps people. I think it's 1,000 people a day going on to Pip. The additions to Pip each year are the equivalent of a city the size of Leicester. That is not a system that can be left unreformed.'
BBC News
19 minutes ago
- BBC News
Mandaric no longer pursuing Sheff Wed return
Former Sheffield Wednesday owner Milan Mandaric is no longer pursuing a return to a statement to BBC Radio Sheffield, Mandaric said that after considering putting together a 'rescue package', he had decided it would not be in the club's best interest if he was to try to assist at this Mandaric understands that there are several parties interested, external in a takeover of the Owls. The 86-year-old Serbian-American businessman owned Wednesday between 2010 and 2015 before selling to current proprietor Dejphon Chansiri, the Owls have been given spending restrictions over the next three transfer windows by the English Football League following failures to pay wages on time. Mandaric had hoped to meet Chansiri during a brief visit to the UK this week, but the current Wednesday owner is not in the on reflection, Mandaric, who also owned Portsmouth and Leicester City before Wednesday, does not believe that he could devote sufficient time to "return the club to the healthy condition I left it in".He also believes that with other parties involved, his potential interest would not be constructive. "At such an important time, I would not want my involvement to either slow down or hinder these discussions," he stated, however, that he would be happy to offer help to Chansiri or any new owner if added: "Nothing would give me greater pleasure than seeing our team competing again for promotion in the coming seasons."Wednesday finished 12th in the Championship last season, 10 points outside the play-off places - they have not played in the top flight since 2003.
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
What are the government's welfare proposals that have split MPs?
Labour MPs are divided over the government's controversial plans to cut welfare spending, as a growing backbench rebellion threatens to halt the measures. More than 120 Labour MPs have signed a 'reasoned amendment' to the bill which would deliver the measures. If passed, this would effectively stop it in its tracks for the time being. The plans have received fierce backlash from charities and campaign groups since their introduction in March, when Rachel Reeves announced: 'The Labour Party is the party of work. We believe that if you can work, you should work. But if you can't work, you should be properly supported.' Ministers have revealed more details about their plans for welfare spending since this, but of those only two key measures are up for a vote on Tuesday. Entitled the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill, this legislation comprises changes those two benefits exclusively. Here's what you need to know: Cutting back PIP eligibility Currently claimed by 3.7 million people, PIP is designed to help with extra costs incurred by living with an illness or disability. The plans see the 'daily living' element of the benefit effectively become harder to claim as the eligibility criteria is tightened. Applicants are currently assessed based on how limited their ability is across ten activities, and awarded points between zero and eight for each based on severity. Under current rules, an applicant needs to be scored at least eight points in any combination to be awarded the lowest rate of PIP. Following the changes, they would need this and to have scored four of these points in a single activity. The planned changes would form the bulk of savings from Labour's welfare reforms, at an estimated £4.1 billion. Under these rules, around 1.5 million current claimants would be found ineligible, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) says. However, the spending watchdog also estimates that this number is closer to 800,000 when accounting for a 'behavioural response,' but acknowledges this is a 'highly uncertain judgement'. Changing Universal Credit rates The other key change in the bill sees the rates of Universal Credit rebalanced, with the standard rate rising while the health-related rate is cut back. Labour said it will 'rebalance payment levels' in Universal Credit to 'promote work and address perverse incentives' in the system, beginning in April 2026. The plans would bring in an across-the-board increase to the standard Universal Credit allowance for new and existing claims from April 2026. This will be a boost of £7 a week, to £106. At the same time, the payment rate for the health-related element of Universal Credit will be frozen. Those already receiving it, will still get £105 a week until 2029/30. Meanwhile, new claimants for this element will get just £54 a week – almost half. These claimants will continue to receive the standard Universal Credit allowance alongside this entitlement, and be eligible from the uplift to that as with any other claimant. Around 2.7 million families are forecast to be in receipt of the health element when the changes come into effect, the OBR says, with all of them affected. What issues have the Labour rebels raised? Several issues are listed in the amendment, with the text highlighting the Office for Budget Responsibility's (OBR) stark analysis that the plans would push 250,000 into poverty, including 50,000 children. Another concern listed is that the government's decision not to conduct a formal consultation with disabled people regarding the two crucial reforms the bill entails. The amendment also notes that members are set to vote on the bill months before the OBR is due to publish its crucial employment impact assessment in autumn 2025, which would detail how many people the reforms are expected to help into work. It also raises the concern is that the additional employment support which has been pledged by the government alongside the reforms is not due until the end of the decade, up to four years after these measures come into effect. Alongside these, no assessment has been published on the impact the changes could have on health or care needs. Despite these issues, the amendment's text also acknowledges "the need for the reform of the social security system" and expresses agreement with "the government's principles for providing support to people into work and protecting people who cannot work."
