5 ms·

Is there a universally accepted definition of AGI?

foobarbecue 3y ago
Obviously not. There is no universally accepted definition of anything. (And, I don't understand Chalmers' question. Some humans have always feared automation, back to the Luddites and probably before.)
ilaksh 3y ago
People use it very inconsistently but I think it now for most people means something like a living digital person with god-like superintelligence although the personhood part is very fuzzy. I always wanted it to apply to any general purpose AI including things like GPT-4, since we don't have another term for that. But in most people's fuzzy brains it connotes being alive, conscious, animal/humanlike, fully autonomous and usually they also assume it has become a million times smarter than human in a short time frame.
- uh_uh 3y ago
  I think you're talking about ASI (artificial superintelligence). AGI just means that it's a general problem solver as opposed to a narrow AI. It doesn't have to be superhuman.
  - ilaksh 3y ago
    That's what I think it should mean, but I see very few discussions these days where anyone uses AGI to describe something that is not superhuman and all of those other traits. So trying to use it as "general problem solver" which makes more sense to me also, is going to confuse most people. Part of the problem is that people don't understand that there can be a difference between general purpose and "living conscious digital superbeing". Somehow if its general purpose then in their minds it automatically is just like a person but also godlike. And that means that people can't admit that any AI is general purpose.
    - ChatGTP 3y ago
      That's what I think it should mean, but I see very few discussions these days where anyone uses AGI to describe something that is not superhuman and all of those other traits. So trying to use it as "general problem solver" which makes more sense to me also, is going to confuse most people. Because almost everyone including top researches assume that once an AGI is a thing, it will quite rapidly become an ASI.
      - ilaksh 3y ago
        But if you look into detail about what they are saying, they are talking about animal/human-like conscious digital beings that have thousands or millions of times the performance of a human. So they are also making a leap there between something that is general purpose and that.
        ChatGTP 3y ago
        Yes, that’s why it’s alarming…
zarzavat 3y ago
AGI is a two dimensional space. The first axis is intelligence, i.e. ability to reason, learn and synthesize, ranging from below-human, human parity, and super-human. The second axis is cost. Ranging from high-cost (more expensive to run an AGI than a human), parity (costs the same as a human employee) and low-cost (much cheaper than a human employee). Different points in this space lead to different outcomes. For example parity intelligence and low cost leads to a world where knowledge workers all lose their jobs. Whereas super-intelligence and high-cost leads to a world where government entities have huge amounts of power over us. Super-intelligence and low-cost leads to a chaotic singularity. Currently we are hovering around far below-human intelligence and very low-cost ($20/month for ChatGPT).
- Smoosh 3y ago
  > leads to a world where government entities have huge amounts of power over us Aren't we already there? Because power must be ceded to government so that it can govern?
  - paulryanrogers 3y ago
    People trade a monopoly on violence for security from anarchy and foreign invasion. Yet there are limits, so when the trade off is no longer worth it the people will institute a new government. If a government has super intelligence the power dynamic may shift so far out of balance the people are effectively helpless.
- nradov 3y ago
  You can't possibly predict the outcomes with any accuracy. This is total speculation.
  - reducesuffering 3y ago
    Exactly. It is like ants predicting humans inventing iPhones
  - zarzavat 3y ago
    You can say that about any kind of model, can’t you? The point of inventing models is not to predict the future, it’s to better understand the world. The weather app on your phone can’t predict Thursday’s weather. But it can help you know more about Thursday than nothing. You could say that the weather app is “speculating”, indeed it is, so what?
nradov 3y ago
No, there is no universally accepted definition of AGI. The most widely accepted definition is passing the Turing Test but I think that standard is flawed because an AGI might have human equivalent intelligence in terms of being able to solve novel problems by making optimal use of limited resources (including time), and yet be unable to fool the examiner into believing that it is a human.
mr_toad 3y ago
And even if there was, could you say for sure that an AI met the definition? For example self-awareness might be part of a definition of intelligence. But an AI can lie about it’s self awareness.

Obviously not. There is no universally accepted definition of anything. (And, I don't understand Chalmers' question. Some humans have always feared automation, back to the Luddites and probably before.)

ilaksh 3y ago

People use it very inconsistently but I think it now for most people means something like a living digital person with god-like superintelligence although the personhood part is very fuzzy. I always wanted it to apply to any general purpose AI including things like GPT-4, since we don't have another term for that. But in most people's fuzzy brains it connotes being alive, conscious, animal/humanlike, fully autonomous and usually they also assume it has become a million times smarter than human in a short time frame.

uh_uh 3y ago
I think you're talking about ASI (artificial superintelligence). AGI just means that it's a general problem solver as opposed to a narrow AI. It doesn't have to be superhuman.
- ilaksh 3y ago
  That's what I think it should mean, but I see very few discussions these days where anyone uses AGI to describe something that is not superhuman and all of those other traits. So trying to use it as "general problem solver" which makes more sense to me also, is going to confuse most people. Part of the problem is that people don't understand that there can be a difference between general purpose and "living conscious digital superbeing". Somehow if its general purpose then in their minds it automatically is just like a person but also godlike. And that means that people can't admit that any AI is general purpose.
  - ChatGTP 3y ago
    That's what I think it should mean, but I see very few discussions these days where anyone uses AGI to describe something that is not superhuman and all of those other traits. So trying to use it as "general problem solver" which makes more sense to me also, is going to confuse most people. Because almost everyone including top researches assume that once an AGI is a thing, it will quite rapidly become an ASI.
    - ilaksh 3y ago
      But if you look into detail about what they are saying, they are talking about animal/human-like conscious digital beings that have thousands or millions of times the performance of a human. So they are also making a leap there between something that is general purpose and that.
      - ChatGTP 3y ago
        Yes, that’s why it’s alarming…

zarzavat 3y ago

AGI is a two dimensional space. The first axis is intelligence, i.e. ability to reason, learn and synthesize, ranging from below-human, human parity, and super-human. The second axis is cost. Ranging from high-cost (more expensive to run an AGI than a human), parity (costs the same as a human employee) and low-cost (much cheaper than a human employee). Different points in this space lead to different outcomes. For example parity intelligence and low cost leads to a world where knowledge workers all lose their jobs. Whereas super-intelligence and high-cost leads to a world where government entities have huge amounts of power over us. Super-intelligence and low-cost leads to a chaotic singularity. Currently we are hovering around far below-human intelligence and very low-cost ($20/month for ChatGPT).

Smoosh 3y ago
> leads to a world where government entities have huge amounts of power over us Aren't we already there? Because power must be ceded to government so that it can govern?
- paulryanrogers 3y ago
  People trade a monopoly on violence for security from anarchy and foreign invasion. Yet there are limits, so when the trade off is no longer worth it the people will institute a new government. If a government has super intelligence the power dynamic may shift so far out of balance the people are effectively helpless.
nradov 3y ago
You can't possibly predict the outcomes with any accuracy. This is total speculation.
- reducesuffering 3y ago
  Exactly. It is like ants predicting humans inventing iPhones
- zarzavat 3y ago
  You can say that about any kind of model, can’t you? The point of inventing models is not to predict the future, it’s to better understand the world. The weather app on your phone can’t predict Thursday’s weather. But it can help you know more about Thursday than nothing. You could say that the weather app is “speculating”, indeed it is, so what?

nradov 3y ago

No, there is no universally accepted definition of AGI. The most widely accepted definition is passing the Turing Test but I think that standard is flawed because an AGI might have human equivalent intelligence in terms of being able to solve novel problems by making optimal use of limited resources (including time), and yet be unable to fool the examiner into believing that it is a human.

mr_toad 3y ago

And even if there was, could you say for sure that an AI met the definition? For example self-awareness might be part of a definition of intelligence. But an AI can lie about it’s self awareness.