Photo Credits: The above image was generated by DALL-E with the prompt "Create an abstract illustration for augmented intelligence vs artificial intelligence".
At CivCheck, we blend both augmented intelligence (AI) and artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to help streamline the building permitting process. While it may seem like a subtle distinction at first, knowing when to rely on full artificial intelligence versus augmented intelligence is critical—especially when human health, safety, and welfare is on the line. In processes like plan reviews, where decisions can affect life-safety, it’s not just about automating tasks; it's about thoughtfully integrating technology to enhance human decision-making without removing the human element.
So, what’s the difference between these two terms? Let's break it down.
Augmented intelligence refers to systems designed to enhance and assist human decision-making, rather than replace it. It’s all about empowering people to make better, faster, and more informed decisions by providing them with data, insights, and tools. Think of augmented intelligence as an assistant that helps amplify human capabilities rather than a standalone entity taking full control.
For example:
On the other hand, artificial intelligence refers to systems capable of making decisions or performing tasks on their own, often without human intervention. These systems are designed to mimic human cognitive functions—learning, reasoning, problem-solving, and even adapting over time. The key distinction here is that artificial intelligence often operates independently, rather than assisting a human in making decisions.
For example:
At CivCheck, we place great importance on determining when to rely on AI and when to use augmented intelligence. In the world of permitting and plan reviews, decisions often carry serious weight—especially when they pertain to the safety of buildings, structures, and public infrastructure.
For example, in a building plan review, an AI system might be able to analyze thousands of documents and detect potential issues much faster than a human reviewer. However, when it comes to understanding the context behind a particular building layout or life safety consideration, we believe it’s essential that a human expert makes the final decision. That’s where augmented intelligence comes in: our systems provide the reviewer with relevant data, potential red flags, and suggestions, but the final decision always remains with the human professional.
We are constantly asking ourselves ethical questions such as: “When should AI make decisions for us?” and “When does human judgment matter most?”
We believe that ethical thinking is the cornerstone of responsible AI deployment. We’re not just focused on efficiency and automation for its own sake; we are mindful of the potential consequences that come with handing over too much decision-making power to machines. By placing humans at the center of the process, we ensure that critical decisions are made with a level of understanding, empathy, and contextual knowledge that machines simply don’t possess.
In the end, it’s not about choosing between artificial intelligence and augmented intelligence—it’s about using both thoughtfully to create safer, more effective processes. At CivCheck, we’re committed to striking that balance every day.
