Final Jeopardy: Man vs. Machine and the Quest to Know Everything


The thrilling story of the computer that can play Jeopardy! Alex Trebek: Meet Watson.

For centuries, people have dreamed of creating a machine that thinks like a human. Scientists have made progress: computers can now beat chess grandmasters and help prevent terrorist attacks. Yet we still await a machine that exhibits the rich complexity of human thought — one that doesn’t just crunch numbers, or take us to a relevant Web page, but understands...

See more details below
Other sellers (Hardcover)
  • All (67) from $1.99   
  • New (17) from $1.99   
  • Used (50) from $1.99   
Sending request ...


The thrilling story of the computer that can play Jeopardy! Alex Trebek: Meet Watson.

For centuries, people have dreamed of creating a machine that thinks like a human. Scientists have made progress: computers can now beat chess grandmasters and help prevent terrorist attacks. Yet we still await a machine that exhibits the rich complexity of human thought — one that doesn’t just crunch numbers, or take us to a relevant Web page, but understands us and gives us what we need.

That vision has driven a team of engineers at IBM. Over three years, they created “Watson” and prepared it for a showdown on Jeopardy!, where it would take on two of the game’s all-time champions, Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter, in a nationally televised event. Final Jeopardy is the entertaining, illuminating story of that computer and that epic match.

It’s a classic tale of Man vs. Machine. Like its human competitors, Watson has to understand language, including puns and irony, and master everything from history, literature, and science to arts, entertainment, and game strategy. After years of training, Watson can find the scrambled state capital in “Hair Gel” (“What is Raleigh?”) and even come up with the facial accessory that made Moshe Dayan recognizable worldwide (“What is an eye patch?”). Watson may just be the smartest machine on earth.

Final Jeopardy traces the arc of Watson’s “life,” from its birth in the IBM labs to its big night on the podium. We meet Hollywood moguls and Jeopardy! masters, genius computer programmers and ambitious scientists, including Watson’s eccentric creator, David Ferrucci. We gain access to Ferrucci’s War Room, where the IBM team works tirelessly to boost Watson’s speed to the buzzer, improve its performance in “train wreck” categories (such as “Books in Español”), and fix glitches like the speech defect Watson developed during its testing phase, when it started adding a d to words ending in n (“What is Pakistand?”).

Much is at stake, especially for IBM. A new generation of Watsons could transform medicine, the law, marketing, even science itself, as machines process huge amounts of data at lightning speed, answer our questions, and possibly come up with new hypotheses.

Showdown aside, it’s clear that the future has arrived. But with it come questions: Where does it leave humans? What will Watson’s heirs be capable of in ten or twenty years? Is it time to declare defeat in the realm of facts? What should we teach our children? And what should we carry around in our own heads?

Final Jeopardy takes on these questions and more in a narrative that’s as fast and fun as the game itself. Baker shows us how smart machines will fit into our world — and how they’ll disrupt it.

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

From Barnes & Noble

In 1997, the Deep Blue computer made front-page headlines worldwide when it defeated world chess champion Garry Kasparov. In mid-February, IBM's Watson artificial intelligence software took on an even more complex challenge, competing on three Jeopardy! episodes against Brad Rutter, the current biggest all-time money winner, and championship streak record holder Ken Jennings. Final Jeopardy the book was finished before that historic face-off, but its subject matter is far more fascinating than any mere game reprise because it provides the behind-the-scenes story of Watson's development into an omnivorous fact-finder.

Publishers Weekly
Forget chess—a television game show is the ultimate test of a thinking machine. Former Business Week technology writer Baker (The Numerati) delivers a sprightly account of IBM's quest to create a computer program, dubbed Watson, that can win at Jeopardy. Baker deftly explores the immense challenge that Jeopardy-style "question answering" poses to a computer, which must comprehend the nuances, obscurities, and puns of natural language and master everything from Sumerian history to Superbowl winners. Watson is both an information-processing juggernaut, searching millions of documents per second, and a child-like naïf with odd speech impediments that thinks the Al in Alcoa stands for Al Capone (one embarrassing gaffe in a practice match prompted programmers to install a profanity filter). Like a cross between Born Yesterday and 2001: A Space Odyssey, Baker's narrative is both charming and terrifying; as Watson's intelligence relentlessly increases, we envision whole job sectors, from call center operators and marketing analysts to, well, quiz-show contestants, vanishing overnight. The result is an entertaining romp through the field of artificial intelligence—and a sobering glimpse of things to come. The book's final chapter, covering the actual games, which will air in mid-February, was not seen by PW. (Feb. 17)
From the Publisher
"The book is the place to go if you're really interested in this version of the quest for creating Artificial Intelligence (AI)....lively" -Seattle Times

"Baker skillfully weaves the two threads of the story together, and the book contains many passages that make the reader not only assess what they think but how they think, and how they have absorbed and stored the knowledge they possess. It’s books like this that remind us there is still so much we don’t understand about our own brains, and that the journey of discovery has only just begun." -Culture Mob

"Baker's narrative is both charming and entertaining romp through the field of artificial intelligence - and a sobering glimpse of things to come." -STARRED, Publishers Weekly

Library Journal
In February 2011, the world watched as a computer named Watson handily beat the two greatest Jeopardy champions of all time. The contest was reminiscent of when IBM's Deep Blue defeated chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov, but Jeopardy was a much more difficult game for a computer to master. Although Baker (The Numerati) reviews the match in his last chapter, his primary focus here is on the compelling story of Watson's creation and education. When IBM organized a team of artificial intelligence experts to make a computer that could play Jeopardy, many were skeptical. How could a computer be taught to analyze the complex clues given in the game and formulate the right answer (or question, in this case)? Would puns and innuendos be recognized by a computer? Baker also reviews the current state of artificial intelligence. VERDICT Recommended for all libraries. This is a thought-provoking view of one of IBM's major contributions to the computing field.—William Baer, Georgia Inst. of Technology Lib., Atlanta
Kirkus Reviews

Are you ready for machines to take over the world? How about just a game show to start with?

That's just the scenario ofBusinessWeek senior technology writer Baker's (The Numerati, 2008) account of the difficult birth of Watson, the IBM computer that just won a championship round on Jeopardy. Cleverly, the author's narrative works regardless of the outcome—for either way, the setup is the same: After the birth of Deep Blue, the supercomputer that beat grandmaster Garry Kasparov in a game of chess in 1997, IBM scientists set about building another machine. This one, like all machines, basically knows nothing—but, intriguingly, can approximate thought all the same. Imagine, as Baker describes it, how we might parse this clue: "This facial ware made Israel's Moshe Dayan instantly recognizable worldwide." You'd have to know something about who Dayan was and probably have been around in the day when the monocular Yul Brynner look-alike walked the earth, whereas Watson would merely go through millions of iterations of binary data by way of a process that, as Baker notes, is "scandalously wasteful of computing resources" to arrive at the correct answer: eyepatch. Scandalously wasteful, perhaps. But imagine a few generations down the line, when Watson will have spawned machines that, to name just one real-world application, can store the texts of every medical-journal article ever written—weighing the newer ones more favorably than those from, say, Victorian England—to aid diagnosticians in their work. But how to get the machine to be able to parse real-world data and skirt the shoals of puns, subtleties, metaphors and all the other tricks human language allows? There's the rub, and Baker provides a fine, often entertaining account of the false steps that led Watson, ever the literalist, to read Malcolm X as "Malcolm Ten" and to confuse Charles Dickens's Oliver Twist with the Pet Shop Boys.

Like Tracy Kidder'sSoul of a New Machine (1981), Baker's book finds us at the dawn of a singularity. It's an excellent case study, and does good double duty as a Philip K. Dick scenario, too.

Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780547483160
  • Publisher: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
  • Publication date: 2/17/2011
  • Pages: 288
  • Product dimensions: 5.70 (w) x 8.30 (h) x 1.10 (d)

Meet the Author

STEPHEN BAKER was BusinessWeek 's senior technology writer for a decade, based first in Paris and later New York. He has also written for the Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, and the Wall Street Journal. Roger Lowenstein called his first book, The Numerati, "an eye-opening and chilling book." Baker blogs at

Read More Show Less

Read an Excerpt


Watson paused. The closest thing it had to a face, a glowing
orb on a flat-panel screen, turned from forest green to
a dark shade of blue. Filaments of yellow and red streamed
steadily across it, like the paths of jets circumnavigating the
globe. This pattern represented a state of quiet anticipation
as the supercomputer awaited the next clue. It was a September
morning in 2010 at IBM Research, in the hills north of
New York City, and the computer, known as Watson, was annihilating
two humans, both champion players, in practice
rounds of Jeopardy! Within months, it would be playing the
game on national television in a million-dollar man vs. machine
match against two of Jeopardy ’s all-time greats.
 As Todd Crain, an actor and the host of these test games,
started to read the next clue, the filaments on Watson’s display
began to jag and tremble. Watson was thinking — or coming
as close to it as a computer could. The $1,600 clue, in the category
The Eyes Have It, read: “This facial ware made Israel’s
Moshe Dayan instantly recognizable worldwide.”
 The three players — two human and one electronic — could
read the words as soon as they appeared on the big Jeopardy
board. But they had to wait for Crain to read the entire clue
before buzzing. That was the rule. As the host pronounced
the last word, a light would signal that contestants could buzz.
The first to hit the button could win $1,600 with the right answer
— or lose the same amount with a wrong one. (In these
test matches, they played with funny money.)
 This pause for reading gave Watson three or four seconds
to hunt down the answer. The first step was to figure out what
the clue meant. One of its programs promptly picked apart
the grammar of the sentence, identifying the verbs, objects,
and key words. In another section, research focused on Moshe
Dayan. Was this a person? A place in Israel? Perhaps a holy
site? Names like John and Maria would signal a person. But
Moshe was more puzzling.
 During these seconds, Watson’s cognitive apparatus —
2,208 computer processors working in concert — mounted a
massive research operation through thousands of documents
around Moshe Dayan and his signature facial ware. After
a second or so, different programs, or algorithms, began to
suggest hundreds of possible answers. To us, many of them
would look like wild guesses. Some were phrases that Dayan
had uttered, others were references to his military campaigns
and facts about Israel. Still others cited various articles of his
clothing. At this point, the computer launched its second
stage of analysis, figuring out which response, if any, merited
its confidence. It proceeded to check and recheck facts, making
sure that Moshe Dayan was indeed a person, an Israeli,
and that the answer referred to something he wore on his face.
 A person looking at Watson’s frantic and repetitive labors
might conclude that the player was unsure of itself, laughably
short on common sense, and scandalously wasteful of com-
puting resources. This was all true. Watson barked up every
tree from every conceivable angle. The pattern on its screen
during this process, circles exploding into little stars, provided
only a hint of the industrial-scale computing at work. In a
room behind the podium, visible through a horizontal window,
Watson’s computers churned, and the fans cooling them
roared. This time, its three seconds of exertion paid off. Watson
came up with a response, sending a signal to a mechanical
device on the podium. It was the size of a large aspirin bottle
with a clear plastic covering. Inside was a Jeopardy buzzer.
About one one-hundredth of a second later, a metal finger inside
this contraption shot downward, pressing the button.
 Justin Bernbach, a thirty-eight-year-old airline lobbyist
from Brooklyn, stood to Watson’s left. He had pocketed
$155,000 while winning seven straight Jeopardy matches in
2009. Unlike Watson, Bernbach understood the sentence. He
knew precisely who Moshe Dayan was as soon as he saw the
clue, and he carried an image of the Israeli leader in his mind.
He gripped the buzzer in his fist and frantically pressed it four
or five times as the light came on.
 But Watson had arrived first.
 “Watson?” said Crain.
 The computer’s amiable male voice arranged the answer,
as Jeopardy demands, in the form of a question: “What is eye
 “Very good,” Crain said. “An eye patch on his lefteye.
Choose again, Watson.”
 Bernbach slumped at his podium. This match with the
machine wasn’t going well.

It was going magnificently for David Ferrucci. As the chief scientist
of the team developing the Jeopardy computer, Ferrucci
was feeling vindicated. Only three years earlier, the suggestion
that a computer might match wits and word skills with human
champions in Jeopardy sparked opposition bordering on
ridicule in the halls of IBM Research. And the final goal of
the venture, a nationally televised match against two Jeopardy
legends, Ken Jennings and Brad Rutter, seemed risky to some,
a bit déclassé to others. Jeopardy, a television show, appeared
to lack the timeless cachet of chess, which IBM computers
had mastered a decade earlier.
 Nonetheless, Ferrucci and his team went ahead and built
their machine. Months earlier, it had fared well in a set of
test matches. But the games revealed flaws in the machine’s
logic and game strategy. It was a good player, but to beat Jennings
and Rutter, who would be jousting for a million-dollar
top prize, it would have to be great. So they had worked
long hours over the summer to revamp Watson. This September
event was the coming-out party for Watson 2.0. It was
the first of fifty-six test matches against a higher level of competitor:
people, like Justin Bernbach, who had won enough
matches to compete in Jeopardy ’s Tournament of Champions.
 In these early matches, Watson was having its way with
them. Ferrucci, monitoring the matches from a crowded observation
booth, was all smiles. Keen to promote its Jeopardy
phenom, IBM’s advertising agency, Ogilvy & Mather, had
hired a film crew to follow Ferrucci’s team and capture the
drama of this opening round of championship matches. The
observation room was packed with cameras. Microphones on
long booms recorded the back-and-forth of engineers as they
discussed algorithms and Watson’s response time, known as
latency. Ferrucci, wearing a mike on his lapel, gave a blow-byblow
commentary as Watson, on the other side of the glass,
strutted its new and smarter self.
 It was almost as if Watson, like a person giddy with hubris,
was primed for a fall. The computer certainly had its
weaknesses. Even when functioning smoothly, it would make
its share of wacky mistakes. Right before the lunch break,
one clue asked about “the inspiration for this title object in
a novel and a 1957 movie [which] actually spanned the Mae
Khlung.” Now, it would be reasonable for a computer to miss
“The Bridge over the River Kwai,” especially since the actual
river has a different name. Perhaps Watson had trouble understanding
the sentence, which was convoluted at best. But
how did the computer land on its outlandish response, “What
is Kafka?” Ferrucci didn’t know. Those things happened, and
Watson still won the two morning matches.
 It was after lunch that things deteriorated. Bernbach,
so frustrated in the morning, started to beat Watson to the
buzzer. Meanwhile, the computer was making risky bets and
flubbing entire categories of clues. Defeat, which had seemed
so remote in the morning, was now just one lost bet away. It
came in the fourth match. Watson was winning by $4,000
when it stumbled on this Final Jeopardy clue: “On Feb. 8,
2010, the headline in a major newspaper in this city read:
‘Amen! After 43 years, our prayers are answered.’ ” Watson
missed the reference to the previous day’s Super Bowl, won by
the New Orleans Saints. It bet $23,000 on Chicago. Bernbach
also botched the clue, guessing New York. But he bet less than
Watson, which made him the first person to defeat the revamped
machine. He pumped his fist.
 In the sixth and last match of the day, Watson trailed Bernbach,
$16,200 to $21,000. The computer landed on a Daily
Double in the category Colleges and Universities, which
meant it could bet everything it had on nailing the clue. A
$5,000 bet would have brought it into a tie with Bernbach. A
larger bet, while risky, could have catapulted the computer toward
victory. “I’ll take five,” Watson said.
 Five. Not $5,000, not $500. Five measly dollars of funny
money. The engineers in the observation booth were stunned.
But they kept quieter than usual; the cameras were rolling.
 Then Watson crashed. It occurred at some point between
placing that lowly bet and attempting to answer a clue about
the first Catholic college in Washington, D.C. Watson’s “front
end,” its voice and avatar, was waiting for its thousands of
processors, or “back end,” to deliver an answer. It received
nothing. Anticipating such a situation, the engineers had prepared
set phrases. “Sorry,” Watson said, reciting one of them,
“I’m stumped.” Its avatar displayed a dark blue circle with a
single filament orbiting mournfully in the Antarctic latitudes.
 What to do? Everyone had ideas. Maybe they should finish
the game with an older version of Watson. Or perhaps
they could hook it up to another up-to-date version of the
program at the company’s Hawthorne labs, six miles down
the road. But some worried that a remote connection would
slow Watson’s response time, causing it to lose more often on
the buzz. In the end, as often happens with computers, a reboot
brought the hulking Jeopardy machine back to life. But
Ferrucci and his team got an all-too-vivid reminder that their
Jeopardy player, even as it prepared for a debut on national
television, could go haywire or shut down at any moment.
When Watson was lifted to the podium, facing banks of cameras
and lights, it was anybody’s guess how it would perform.
Watson, it was clear, had a frighteningly broad repertoire.

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents


Introduction 1

1. The Germ of the Jeopardy Machine 19
2. And Representing the Humans 42
3. Blue J Is Born 62
4. Educating Blue J 81
5. Watson’s Face 104
6. Watson Takes On Humans 124
7. AI 148
8. A Season of Jitters 170
9. Watson Looks for Work 189
10. How to Play the Game 210
11. The Match 232

Acknowledgments 259
Notes 263
Sources and Further Reading 267
About the Author 269

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
Sort by: Showing all of 2 Customer Reviews
  • Posted June 14, 2011

    more from this reviewer

    an easy read on a fascinating subject

    I liked this as a supplement to watching Watson on Jeopardy. It would have been better had it been slightly more timely but no complaints other than that.

    0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted February 12, 2011

    Great Book terrible price

    I wanted to buy this ebook for my Nook, but when I saw the price was the same as the hard cover I was upset, then I checked Amazon and saw that the same ebook for the Kindle is only $9.99. I think I will just buy a Kindle, I will save back the $129 it costs to purchase the Kindle pretty quickly if I can save at least $4.00 on each book I buy!

    0 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
Sort by: Showing all of 2 Customer Reviews

If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
Why is this product inappropriate?
Comments (optional)