[MiroF]

> I think you assume here that the historical effects that led to Siemens sensors correlating with failure will continue to be true in the future.

Yes, AI systems presume induction to be true. But so does... uh, science and most other things we do?

[gizmo686]

Science has trained experts thinking about the data.

If you set a team of scientists to find a way of predicting failure of turbines, they might notice a correlation between Siemens sensors and failure. They would then look for and attempt to prove theories to explain this descrepency. In doing so, they would likly discover that, not only can they not find a causative theory, but the correlation goes away when they control for age.

AI systems stop after the first step, yet somehow are perceived as better than expert humans.

[bumby]

That's an interesting way to frame it. AI may stop at proximate causes rather than finding root causes

[munificent]

Or: AI shows correlation which we then implicitly treat as causation.