Artificial General Intelligence

Aus Vokipedia
(Unterschied zwischen Versionen)
Wechseln zu: Navigation, Suche
(Die Seite wurde neu angelegt: „<br>Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a kind of expert system (AI) that matches or goes beyond human cognitive abilities throughout a large variety of c…“)
 
K
 
Zeile 1: Zeile 1:
<br>Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a kind of expert system (AI) that matches or goes beyond human cognitive abilities throughout a large variety of cognitive jobs. This contrasts with narrow [http://lucwaterpolo2003.free.fr AI], which is limited to particular tasks. [1] Artificial superintelligence (ASI), on the other hand, refers to AGI that greatly exceeds human cognitive abilities. AGI is thought about one of the definitions of strong AI.<br><br><br>Creating AGI is a main objective of AI research study and of companies such as OpenAI [2] and Meta. [3] A 2020 survey identified 72 active AGI research and advancement jobs throughout 37 countries. [4]<br><br>The timeline for achieving AGI stays a topic of continuous debate amongst scientists and professionals. Since 2023, some argue that it may be possible in years or decades; others maintain it might take a century or longer; a minority believe it may never be attained; and another minority claims that it is already here. [5] [6] Notable [http://gogs.fundit.cn:3000 AI] researcher Geoffrey Hinton has revealed issues about the quick development towards AGI, recommending it could be achieved faster than numerous expect. [7]<br><br>There is dispute on the precise meaning of AGI and concerning whether contemporary large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 are early kinds of AGI. [8] AGI is a common topic in sci-fi and futures studies. [9] [10]<br><br>Contention exists over whether AGI represents an existential risk. [11] [12] [13] Many professionals on AI have mentioned that reducing the threat of human termination positioned by AGI must be a global priority. [14] [15] Others find the advancement of AGI to be too remote to present such a threat. [16] [17]<br><br>Terminology<br><br><br>AGI is likewise known as strong [https://monathemannequin.com AI], [18] [19] full AI, [20] human-level [https://oldchicken.kr AI], [5] human-level smart AI, or general smart action. [21]<br><br>Some scholastic sources reserve the term "strong [https://taxandmanagement.be AI]" for computer programs that experience life or consciousness. [a] In contrast, weak [https://baptiste-penin.fr AI] (or narrow [http://hydrology.irpi.cnr.it AI]) has the ability to fix one particular problem but lacks basic cognitive capabilities. [22] [19] Some academic sources utilize "weak AI" to refer more broadly to any programs that neither experience consciousness nor have a mind in the same sense as people. [a]<br><br>Related concepts include synthetic superintelligence and transformative [http://nioutaik.fr AI]. An artificial superintelligence (ASI) is a hypothetical type of AGI that is much more normally intelligent than human beings, [23] while the idea of transformative AI associates with AI having a large impact on society, for example, comparable to the farming or industrial transformation. [24]<br><br>A framework for classifying AGI in levels was proposed in 2023 by Google DeepMind scientists. They specify 5 levels of AGI: emerging, skilled, specialist, virtuoso, and superhuman. For  [http://www.vokipedia.de/index.php?title=Benutzer:Lawanna33Z vokipedia.de] example, a qualified AGI is specified as an [https://austin-koffron.com AI] that surpasses 50% of experienced grownups in a large range of non-physical tasks, and a superhuman AGI (i.e. an artificial superintelligence) is likewise specified but with a threshold of 100%. They consider big language models like ChatGPT or LLaMA 2 to be instances of emerging AGI. [25]<br><br>Characteristics<br><br><br>Various popular meanings of intelligence have actually been proposed. Among the leading propositions is the Turing test. However, there are other well-known definitions, and some scientists disagree with the more popular methods. [b]<br><br>Intelligence qualities<br><br><br>Researchers generally hold that intelligence is required to do all of the following: [27]<br><br>reason, use strategy, fix puzzles, and make judgments under unpredictability<br>represent understanding, consisting of good sense understanding<br>plan<br>find out<br>- interact in natural language<br>- if required, integrate these abilities in conclusion of any offered objective<br><br><br>Many interdisciplinary techniques (e.g. cognitive science, computational intelligence, and choice making) think about extra traits such as imagination (the ability to form unique mental images and concepts) [28] and autonomy. [29]<br><br>Computer-based systems that show many of these capabilities exist (e.g. see computational imagination, automated thinking, choice support system, robotic, evolutionary computation, smart agent). There is argument about whether modern AI systems possess them to an adequate degree.<br><br><br>Physical characteristics<br><br><br>Other abilities are considered desirable in smart systems, as they might affect intelligence or help in its expression. These include: [30]<br><br>- the capability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc), and<br>- the capability to act (e.g. relocation and manipulate things, modification area to explore, and so on).<br><br><br>This consists of the ability to discover and react to threat. [31]<br><br>Although the capability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc) and the capability to act (e.g. move and control objects, change place to check out, etc) can be desirable for some intelligent systems, [30] these physical capabilities are not strictly required for an entity to certify as AGI-particularly under the thesis that big language models (LLMs) might currently be or end up being AGI. Even from a less positive point of view on LLMs, there is no firm requirement for an AGI to have a human-like kind; being a silicon-based computational system suffices, offered it can process input (language) from the external world in place of human senses. This interpretation aligns with the understanding that AGI has never ever been proscribed a particular physical personification and therefore does not demand a capacity for locomotion or traditional "eyes and ears". [32]<br><br>Tests for human-level AGI<br><br><br>Several tests meant to validate human-level AGI have been considered, including: [33] [34]<br><br>The idea of the test is that the machine has to try and pretend to be a man, by responding to concerns put to it, and it will only pass if the pretence is reasonably convincing. A substantial portion of a jury, who need to not be skilled about makers, must be taken in by the pretence. [37]<br><br>AI-complete problems<br><br><br>An issue is informally called "AI-complete" or "[https://jauleska.com AI]-hard" if it is believed that in order to resolve it, one would require to implement AGI, since the service is beyond the capabilities of a purpose-specific algorithm. [47]<br><br>There are many problems that have actually been conjectured to need general intelligence to solve along with humans. Examples include computer system vision, natural language understanding, and dealing with unforeseen circumstances while solving any real-world issue. [48] Even a specific task like translation needs a device to read and compose in both languages, follow the author's argument (factor), understand the context (knowledge), and faithfully replicate the author's original intent (social intelligence). All of these issues need to be solved simultaneously in order to reach human-level maker performance.<br><br><br>However, a lot of these jobs can now be carried out by modern-day big language models. According to Stanford University's 2024 AI index, AI has actually reached human-level efficiency on numerous benchmarks for reading understanding and visual reasoning. [49]<br><br>History<br><br><br>Classical AI<br> <br><br>Modern AI research began in the mid-1950s. [50] The first generation of [http://git.dgtis.com AI] researchers were encouraged that artificial basic intelligence was possible which it would exist in just a few decades. [51] [http://abrahamsenaquarel.nl AI] leader Herbert A. Simon composed in 1965: "devices will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a male can do." [52]<br><br>Their predictions were the inspiration for Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke's character HAL 9000, who embodied what [http://lesstagiaires.com AI] scientists believed they might create by the year 2001. [http://airbicy.com AI] pioneer Marvin Minsky was a consultant [53] on the job of making HAL 9000 as reasonable as possible according to the agreement forecasts of the time. He stated in 1967, "Within a generation ... the problem of creating 'synthetic intelligence' will substantially be solved". [54]<br><br>Several classical AI jobs, such as Doug Lenat's Cyc job (that started in 1984), and Allen Newell's Soar task, were directed at AGI.<br><br><br>However, in the early 1970s, it became obvious that scientists had grossly undervalued the problem of the task. Funding companies became hesitant of AGI and put researchers under increasing pressure to produce helpful "applied AI". [c] In the early 1980s, Japan's Fifth Generation Computer Project revived interest in AGI, setting out a ten-year timeline that consisted of AGI objectives like "carry on a casual conversation". [58] In reaction to this and the success of specialist systems, both industry and federal government pumped money into the field. [56] [59] However, self-confidence in AI spectacularly collapsed in the late 1980s, and the goals of the Fifth Generation Computer Project were never ever satisfied. [60] For the 2nd time in twenty years, [https://josephaborowa.com AI] researchers who anticipated the impending achievement of AGI had been mistaken. By the 1990s, AI researchers had a credibility for making vain pledges. They ended up being unwilling to make forecasts at all [d] and prevented mention of "human level" expert system for worry of being labeled "wild-eyed dreamer [s]. [62]<br><br>Narrow AI research study<br><br><br>In the 1990s and early 21st century, mainstream AI attained business success and scholastic respectability by concentrating on particular sub-problems where AI can produce proven outcomes and commercial applications, such as speech recognition and suggestion algorithms. [63] These "applied AI" systems are now used thoroughly throughout the innovation industry, and research in this vein is greatly funded in both academic community and market. As of 2018 [update], advancement in this field was thought about an emerging trend, and a fully grown phase was anticipated to be reached in more than ten years. [64]<br><br>At the turn of the century, many mainstream [https://www.fassadendeko.ch AI] scientists [65] hoped that strong AI might be established by combining programs that solve numerous sub-problems. Hans Moravec composed in 1988:<br><br><br>I am confident that this bottom-up route to synthetic intelligence will one day satisfy the traditional top-down path more than half way, prepared to provide the real-world proficiency and the commonsense understanding that has actually been so frustratingly evasive in thinking programs. Fully smart makers will result when the metaphorical golden spike is driven joining the two efforts. [65]<br><br>However, even at the time, this was disputed. For example, Stevan Harnad of Princeton University concluded his 1990 paper on the symbol grounding hypothesis by mentioning:<br><br><br>The expectation has typically been voiced that "top-down" (symbolic) approaches to modeling cognition will in some way satisfy "bottom-up" (sensory) approaches someplace in between. If the grounding considerations in this paper stand, then this expectation is hopelessly modular and there is truly just one viable path from sense to symbols: from the ground up. A free-floating symbolic level like the software application level of a computer will never be reached by this path (or vice versa) - nor is it clear why we ought to even attempt to reach such a level, since it appears arriving would simply amount to uprooting our symbols from their intrinsic significances (consequently simply lowering ourselves to the practical equivalent of a programmable computer system). [66]<br><br>Modern synthetic basic intelligence research study<br><br><br>The term "artificial basic intelligence" was used as early as 1997, by Mark Gubrud [67] in a conversation of the ramifications of completely automated military production and operations. A mathematical formalism of AGI was proposed by Marcus Hutter in 2000. Named AIXI, the proposed AGI agent maximises "the ability to please objectives in a large range of environments". [68] This kind of AGI, defined by the capability to maximise a mathematical definition of intelligence rather than display human-like behaviour, [69] was also called universal expert system. [70]<br><br>The term AGI was re-introduced and popularized by Shane Legg and Ben Goertzel around 2002. [71] AGI research study activity in 2006 was explained by Pei Wang and Ben Goertzel [72] as "producing publications and preliminary outcomes". The first summer season school in AGI was organized in Xiamen, China in 2009 [73] by the Xiamen university's Artificial Brain Laboratory and OpenCog. The first university course was given up 2010 [74] and 2011 [75] at Plovdiv University, Bulgaria by Todor Arnaudov. MIT presented a course on AGI in 2018, organized by Lex Fridman and featuring a variety of guest speakers.<br><br><br>Since 2023 [update], a small number of computer scientists are active in AGI research, and many add to a series of AGI conferences. However, significantly more scientists have an interest in open-ended learning, [76] [77] which is the idea of enabling [https://voicync.com AI] to constantly discover and innovate like human beings do.<br><br><br>Feasibility<br><br><br>Since 2023, the development and prospective accomplishment of AGI stays a subject of extreme debate within the AI community. While standard agreement held that AGI was a remote objective, recent advancements have actually led some researchers and industry figures to declare that early kinds of AGI might currently exist. [78] AI pioneer Herbert A. Simon speculated in 1965 that "makers will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a male can do". This forecast stopped working to come true. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen thought that such intelligence is not likely in the 21st century because it would require "unforeseeable and basically unforeseeable developments" and a "clinically deep understanding of cognition". [79] Writing in The Guardian, roboticist Alan Winfield claimed the gulf in between modern-day computing and human-level artificial intelligence is as large as the gulf in between current space flight and practical faster-than-light spaceflight. [80]<br><br>An additional challenge is the lack of clearness in specifying what intelligence requires. Does it require consciousness? Must it show the ability to set objectives in addition to pursue them? Is it purely a matter of scale such that if design sizes increase sufficiently, intelligence will emerge? Are centers such as preparation, reasoning, and causal understanding required? Does intelligence require clearly replicating the brain and its particular faculties? Does it require emotions? [81]<br><br>Most AI researchers believe strong AI can be attained in the future, but some thinkers, like Hubert Dreyfus and Roger Penrose, deny the possibility of attaining strong [http://122.112.209.52 AI]. [82] [83] John McCarthy is amongst those who believe human-level AI will be achieved, however that today level of development is such that a date can not properly be anticipated. [84] AI professionals' views on the feasibility of AGI wax and subside. Four polls performed in 2012 and 2013 suggested that the average estimate among experts for when they would be 50% positive AGI would get here was 2040 to 2050, depending on the survey, with the mean being 2081. Of the specialists, 16.5% addressed with "never" when asked the same question however with a 90% self-confidence instead. [85] [86] Further existing AGI development factors to consider can be discovered above Tests for validating human-level AGI.<br><br><br>A report by Stuart Armstrong and Kaj Sotala of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute found that "over [a] 60-year amount of time there is a strong predisposition towards forecasting the arrival of human-level [https://intunz.com AI] as in between 15 and 25 years from the time the prediction was made". They examined 95 forecasts made between 1950 and 2012 on when human-level AI will come about. [87]<br><br>In 2023, Microsoft scientists published a detailed assessment of GPT-4. They concluded: "Given the breadth and depth of GPT-4's capabilities, our company believe that it could reasonably be considered as an early (yet still incomplete) version of an artificial basic intelligence (AGI) system." [88] Another research study in 2023 reported that GPT-4 surpasses 99% of humans on the Torrance tests of imaginative thinking. [89] [90]<br><br>Blaise Agüera y Arcas and Peter Norvig composed in 2023 that a significant level of basic intelligence has already been achieved with frontier designs. They wrote that unwillingness to this view originates from 4 main factors: a "healthy apprehension about metrics for AGI", an "ideological commitment to alternative [https://git.as61349.net AI] theories or methods", a "dedication to human (or biological) exceptionalism", or a "issue about the financial ramifications of AGI". [91]<br><br>2023 likewise marked the development of large multimodal models (big language designs capable of processing or creating numerous techniques such as text, audio, and images). [92]<br><br>In 2024, OpenAI released o1-preview, the first of a series of models that "invest more time believing before they react". According to Mira Murati, this capability to think before responding represents a new, additional paradigm. It enhances model outputs by spending more computing power when creating the answer, whereas the model scaling paradigm improves outputs by increasing the model size, training data and training compute power. [93] [94]<br><br>An OpenAI worker, Vahid Kazemi, claimed in 2024 that the company had attained AGI, mentioning, "In my opinion, we have currently achieved AGI and it's a lot more clear with O1." Kazemi clarified that while the AI is not yet "better than any human at any task", it is "better than most humans at a lot of tasks." He likewise attended to criticisms that big language models (LLMs) merely follow predefined patterns, comparing their learning process to the scientific technique of observing, assuming, and confirming. These statements have sparked debate, as they rely on a broad and non-traditional meaning of AGI-traditionally understood as AI that matches human intelligence across all domains. Critics argue that, while OpenAI's designs demonstrate amazing versatility, they might not fully fulfill this requirement. Notably, Kazemi's comments came shortly after OpenAI got rid of "AGI" from the regards to its partnership with Microsoft, prompting speculation about the company's tactical objectives. [95]<br><br>Timescales<br><br><br>Progress in expert system has historically gone through periods of fast progress separated by durations when development appeared to stop. [82] Ending each hiatus were essential advances in hardware, software or both to create area for further progress. [82] [98] [99] For example, the hardware readily available in the twentieth century was not adequate to execute deep learning, which needs great deals of GPU-enabled CPUs. [100]<br><br>In the introduction to his 2006 book, [101] Goertzel states that quotes of the time needed before a genuinely versatile AGI is developed differ from 10 years to over a century. Since 2007 [update], the agreement in the AGI research neighborhood seemed to be that the timeline discussed by Ray Kurzweil in 2005 in The Singularity is Near [102] (i.e. between 2015 and 2045) was plausible. [103] Mainstream [https://heiola.eu AI] scientists have offered a broad variety of opinions on whether development will be this rapid. A 2012 meta-analysis of 95 such viewpoints found a bias towards anticipating that the beginning of AGI would take place within 16-26 years for modern and historical predictions alike. That paper has actually been criticized for how it categorized opinions as expert or non-expert. [104]<br><br>In 2012, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton established a neural network called AlexNet, which won the ImageNet competitors with a top-5 test mistake rate of 15.3%, considerably better than the second-best entry's rate of 26.3% (the standard approach utilized a weighted sum of ratings from different pre-defined classifiers). [105] AlexNet was considered as the preliminary ground-breaker of the present deep knowing wave. [105]<br><br>In 2017, researchers Feng Liu, Yong Shi, and Ying Liu performed intelligence tests on openly readily available and easily available weak AI such as Google AI, Apple's Siri, and others. At the maximum, these AIs reached an IQ value of about 47, which corresponds around to a six-year-old kid in first grade. A grownup pertains to about 100 typically. Similar tests were performed in 2014, with the IQ rating reaching an optimum value of 27. [106] [107]<br><br>In 2020, OpenAI established GPT-3, a language model capable of carrying out many diverse tasks without particular training. According to Gary Grossman in a VentureBeat post, while there is agreement that GPT-3 is not an example of AGI, it is thought about by some to be too advanced to be classified as a narrow [https://es-africa.com AI] system. [108]<br><br>In the very same year, Jason Rohrer utilized his GPT-3 account to establish a chatbot, and offered a chatbot-developing platform called "Project December". OpenAI requested modifications to the chatbot to comply with their security guidelines; Rohrer disconnected Project December from the GPT-3 API. [109]<br><br>In 2022, DeepMind established Gato, a "general-purpose" system efficient in carrying out more than 600 various tasks. [110]<br><br>In 2023, Microsoft Research published a research study on an early version of OpenAI's GPT-4, competing that it showed more basic intelligence than previous AI models and showed human-level performance in tasks covering numerous domains, such as mathematics, coding, and law. This research sparked a dispute on whether GPT-4 might be thought about an early, incomplete version of artificial general intelligence, highlighting the need for further expedition and assessment of such systems. [111]<br><br>In 2023, the AI scientist Geoffrey Hinton mentioned that: [112]<br><br>The idea that this stuff might really get smarter than people - a few people thought that, [...] But the majority of people thought it was method off. And I believed it was method off. I believed it was 30 to 50 years or perhaps longer away. Obviously, I no longer think that.<br><br><br>In May 2023, Demis Hassabis likewise said that "The development in the last couple of years has actually been quite incredible", which he sees no factor why it would slow down, expecting AGI within a decade or even a few years. [113] In March 2024, Nvidia's CEO, Jensen Huang, specified his expectation that within 5 years, AI would be capable of passing any test a minimum of in addition to human beings. [114] In June 2024, the AI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former OpenAI staff member, estimated AGI by 2027 to be "strikingly possible". [115]<br><br>Whole brain emulation<br><br><br>While the advancement of transformer models like in ChatGPT is considered the most appealing course to AGI, [116] [117] entire brain emulation can function as an alternative method. With whole brain simulation, a brain design is developed by scanning and mapping a biological brain in information, and after that copying and replicating it on a computer system or another computational gadget. The simulation design need to be adequately devoted to the original, so that it behaves in virtually the exact same method as the initial brain. [118] Whole brain emulation is a kind of brain simulation that is gone over in computational neuroscience and neuroinformatics, and for medical research purposes. It has been discussed in expert system research study [103] as an approach to strong [https://sos.shinhan.ac.kr AI]. Neuroimaging technologies that might deliver the needed in-depth understanding are improving quickly, and futurist Ray Kurzweil in the book The Singularity Is Near [102] predicts that a map of adequate quality will appear on a similar timescale to the computing power needed to replicate it.<br><br><br>Early estimates<br><br><br>For low-level brain simulation, an extremely effective cluster of computer systems or GPUs would be needed, offered the enormous quantity of synapses within the human brain. Each of the 1011 (one hundred billion) neurons has on typical 7,000 synaptic connections (synapses) to other nerve cells. The brain of a three-year-old child has about 1015 synapses (1 quadrillion). This number declines with age, stabilizing by the adult years. Estimates differ for an adult, ranging from 1014 to 5 × 1014 synapses (100 to 500 trillion). [120] A quote of the brain's processing power, based upon a basic switch model for neuron activity, is around 1014 (100 trillion) synaptic updates per second (SUPS). [121]<br><br>In 1997, Kurzweil looked at different quotes for the hardware needed to equate to the human brain and embraced a figure of 1016 computations per second (cps). [e] (For comparison, if a "calculation" was comparable to one "floating-point operation" - a step used to rate current supercomputers - then 1016 "calculations" would be equivalent to 10 petaFLOPS, attained in 2011, while 1018 was attained in 2022.) He utilized this figure to predict the essential hardware would be offered at some point between 2015 and 2025, if the rapid growth in computer power at the time of writing continued.<br><br><br>Current research<br><br><br>The Human Brain Project, an EU-funded initiative active from 2013 to 2023, has developed a particularly comprehensive and publicly available atlas of the human brain. [124] In 2023, scientists from Duke University performed a high-resolution scan of a mouse brain.<br><br><br>Criticisms of simulation-based methods<br><br><br>The synthetic neuron design assumed by Kurzweil and used in numerous present synthetic neural network executions is simple compared with biological nerve cells. A brain simulation would likely need to capture the detailed cellular behaviour of biological neurons, presently comprehended only in broad overview. The overhead introduced by complete modeling of the biological, chemical, and physical details of neural behaviour (specifically on a molecular scale) would require computational powers a number of orders of magnitude larger than Kurzweil's price quote. In addition, the estimates do not represent glial cells, which are understood to contribute in cognitive procedures. [125]<br><br>A basic criticism of the simulated brain technique originates from embodied cognition theory which asserts that human personification is an important element of human intelligence and is essential to ground meaning. [126] [127] If this theory is proper, any fully practical brain model will require to incorporate more than simply the nerve cells (e.g., a robotic body). Goertzel [103] proposes virtual embodiment (like in metaverses like Second Life) as a choice, but it is unknown whether this would be sufficient.<br> <br><br>Philosophical point of view<br><br><br>"Strong AI" as specified in viewpoint<br><br><br>In 1980, thinker John Searle created the term "strong AI" as part of his Chinese space argument. [128] He proposed a distinction in between 2 hypotheses about artificial intelligence: [f]<br><br>Strong AI hypothesis: An artificial intelligence system can have "a mind" and "consciousness".<br>Weak [https://judicialreports.bg AI] hypothesis: An artificial intelligence system can (just) act like it thinks and has a mind and consciousness.<br><br><br>The first one he called "strong" due to the fact that it makes a stronger declaration: it assumes something unique has actually taken place to the machine that surpasses those abilities that we can evaluate. The behaviour of a "weak AI" machine would be exactly similar to a "strong AI" maker, but the latter would also have subjective conscious experience. This usage is likewise common in scholastic AI research and books. [129]<br><br>In contrast to Searle and mainstream AI, some futurists such as Ray Kurzweil use the term "strong AI" to indicate "human level artificial general intelligence". [102] This is not the like Searle's strong AI, unless it is presumed that awareness is essential for human-level AGI. Academic theorists such as Searle do not believe that holds true, and to most artificial intelligence scientists the question is out-of-scope. [130]<br><br>Mainstream [https://7yue.net AI] is most thinking about how a program acts. [131] According to Russell and Norvig, "as long as the program works, they do not care if you call it genuine or a simulation." [130] If the program can act as if it has a mind, then there is no requirement to understand if it really has mind - certainly, there would be no chance to tell. For [http://122.112.209.52 AI] research study, Searle's "weak [https://www.findnaukri.pk AI] hypothesis" is equivalent to the declaration "synthetic basic intelligence is possible". Thus, according to Russell and Norvig, "most AI researchers take the weak AI hypothesis for granted, and do not care about the strong AI hypothesis." [130] Thus, for academic AI research, "Strong AI" and "AGI" are two various things.<br><br><br>Consciousness<br><br><br>Consciousness can have numerous meanings, and some aspects play significant roles in sci-fi and the ethics of synthetic intelligence:<br><br><br>Sentience (or "incredible awareness"): The ability to "feel" perceptions or emotions subjectively, as opposed to the capability to factor about understandings. Some philosophers, such as David Chalmers, use the term "awareness" to refer specifically to remarkable consciousness, which is approximately equivalent to sentience. [132] Determining why and how subjective experience occurs is called the hard issue of consciousness. [133] Thomas Nagel discussed in 1974 that it "seems like" something to be mindful. If we are not mindful, then it doesn't seem like anything. Nagel utilizes the example of a bat: we can sensibly ask "what does it feel like to be a bat?" However, we are unlikely to ask "what does it feel like to be a toaster?" Nagel concludes that a bat seems mindful (i.e., has awareness) however a toaster does not. [134] In 2022, a Google engineer claimed that the company's AI chatbot, LaMDA, had attained life, though this claim was extensively contested by other specialists. [135]<br><br>Self-awareness: To have mindful awareness of oneself as a separate individual, specifically to be consciously knowledgeable about one's own ideas. This is opposed to simply being the "subject of one's believed"-an operating system or debugger has the ability to be "familiar with itself" (that is, to represent itself in the very same method it represents whatever else)-but this is not what people normally mean when they utilize the term "self-awareness". [g]<br><br>These traits have an ethical dimension. [http://devhub.dost.gov.ph AI] life would provide rise to concerns of welfare and legal security, likewise to animals. [136] Other elements of awareness associated to cognitive abilities are also relevant to the principle of AI rights. [137] Figuring out how to incorporate advanced AI with existing legal and social structures is an emergent issue. [138]<br><br>Benefits<br><br><br>AGI might have a variety of applications. If oriented towards such objectives, AGI might assist alleviate various problems worldwide such as hunger, hardship and illness. [139]<br><br>AGI might improve efficiency and effectiveness in a lot of jobs. For instance, in public health, AGI might accelerate medical research, especially versus cancer. [140] It might look after the elderly, [141] and democratize access to rapid, high-quality medical diagnostics. It could offer enjoyable, low-cost and tailored education. [141] The need to work to subsist could become obsolete if the wealth produced is correctly redistributed. [141] [142] This likewise raises the concern of the location of humans in a drastically automated society.<br><br><br>AGI could likewise help to make logical choices, and to anticipate and prevent disasters. It could likewise assist to profit of possibly disastrous innovations such as nanotechnology or climate engineering, while avoiding the associated dangers. [143] If an AGI's main objective is to avoid existential catastrophes such as human termination (which could be hard if the Vulnerable World Hypothesis ends up being true), [144] it might take steps to dramatically reduce the risks [143] while decreasing the effect of these measures on our quality of life.<br><br><br>Risks<br><br><br>Existential risks<br><br><br>AGI may represent numerous types of existential threat, which are risks that threaten "the early termination of Earth-originating smart life or the irreversible and drastic destruction of its potential for desirable future development". [145] The threat of human extinction from AGI has been the topic of numerous arguments, but there is also the possibility that the development of AGI would cause a completely problematic future. Notably, it could be utilized to spread and maintain the set of worths of whoever establishes it. If humanity still has moral blind spots comparable to slavery in the past, AGI may irreversibly entrench it, preventing moral development. [146] Furthermore, AGI might assist in mass monitoring and brainwashing, which could be used to produce a stable repressive around the world totalitarian regime. [147] [148] There is likewise a risk for the makers themselves. If machines that are sentient or otherwise deserving of moral factor to consider are mass produced in the future, engaging in a civilizational course that indefinitely disregards their well-being and interests could be an existential disaster. [149] [150] Considering how much AGI could enhance humankind's future and assistance decrease other existential risks, Toby Ord calls these existential dangers "an argument for proceeding with due care", not for "abandoning AI". [147]<br><br>Risk of loss of control and human extinction<br><br><br>The thesis that [https://naukriupdate.pk AI] presents an existential risk for humans, which this threat requires more attention, is questionable but has been endorsed in 2023 by numerous public figures, AI researchers and CEOs of [https://eyris.de AI] companies such as Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Demis Hassabis and Sam Altman. [151] [152]<br><br>In 2014, Stephen Hawking slammed extensive indifference:<br><br><br>So, dealing with possible futures of enormous advantages and dangers, the experts are definitely doing everything possible to guarantee the very best outcome, right? Wrong. If an exceptional alien civilisation sent us a message saying, 'We'll show up in a couple of years,' would we simply reply, 'OK, call us when you get here-we'll leave the lights on?' Probably not-but this is more or less what is occurring with [https://eikelpoth.com AI]. [153]<br><br>The prospective fate of mankind has sometimes been compared to the fate of gorillas threatened by human activities. The contrast specifies that greater intelligence allowed mankind to control gorillas, which are now susceptible in manner ins which they could not have expected. As an outcome, the gorilla has actually ended up being an endangered types, not out of malice, however just as a civilian casualties from human activities. [154]<br><br>The skeptic Yann LeCun considers that AGIs will have no desire to control mankind which we ought to take care not to anthropomorphize them and analyze their intents as we would for human beings. He stated that people won't be "clever enough to create super-intelligent makers, yet ridiculously dumb to the point of offering it moronic goals without any safeguards". [155] On the other side, the principle of instrumental merging suggests that almost whatever their goals, smart representatives will have factors to attempt to endure and obtain more power as intermediary steps to attaining these goals. And that this does not need having feelings. [156]<br><br>Many scholars who are concerned about existential risk supporter for more research into resolving the "control issue" to respond to the concern: what types of safeguards, algorithms, or architectures can developers carry out to increase the likelihood that their recursively-improving AI would continue to act in a friendly, rather than harmful, manner after it reaches superintelligence? [157] [158] Solving the control problem is made complex by the [http://gogs.fundit.cn:3000 AI] arms race (which might cause a race to the bottom of security preventative measures in order to release items before competitors), [159] and using [https://www.saoluizhotel.com.br AI] in weapon systems. [160]<br><br>The thesis that AI can position existential threat likewise has detractors. Skeptics generally say that AGI is not likely in the short-term, or that issues about AGI sidetrack from other issues associated with existing AI. [161] Former Google scams czar Shuman Ghosemajumder considers that for numerous people outside of the technology industry, existing chatbots and LLMs are currently perceived as though they were AGI, resulting in more misconception and fear. [162]<br><br>Skeptics in some cases charge that the thesis is crypto-religious, with an illogical belief in the possibility of superintelligence changing an unreasonable belief in an omnipotent God. [163] Some researchers believe that the interaction projects on AI existential threat by specific AI groups (such as OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepMind, and Conjecture) may be an at attempt at regulative capture and to pump up interest in their items. [164] [165]<br><br>In 2023, the CEOs of Google DeepMind, OpenAI and Anthropic, along with other industry leaders and researchers, released a joint statement asserting that "Mitigating the risk of termination from AI need to be an international priority alongside other societal-scale threats such as pandemics and nuclear war." [152]<br><br>Mass unemployment<br><br><br>Researchers from OpenAI estimated that "80% of the U.S. workforce could have at least 10% of their work tasks impacted by the introduction of LLMs, while around 19% of employees might see at least 50% of their jobs impacted". [166] [167] They think about workplace employees to be the most exposed, for example mathematicians, accountants or web designers. [167] AGI could have a better autonomy, capability to make choices, to user interface with other computer tools, however also to control robotized bodies.<br><br><br>According to Stephen Hawking, the result of automation on the lifestyle will depend upon how the wealth will be rearranged: [142]<br><br>Everyone can delight in a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or many people can end up badly poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby versus wealth redistribution. So far, the pattern seems to be towards the second alternative, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality<br><br><br>Elon Musk thinks about that the automation of society will need governments to embrace a universal basic income. [168]<br><br>See also<br><br><br>Artificial brain - Software and hardware with cognitive abilities comparable to those of the animal or human brain<br>AI impact<br>AI security - Research location on making AI safe and beneficial<br>AI alignment - [http://enjoyablue.com AI] conformance to the intended objective<br>A.I. Rising - 2018 movie directed by Lazar Bodroža<br>Expert system<br>Automated device knowing - Process of automating the application of device learning<br>BRAIN Initiative - Collaborative public-private research effort announced by the Obama administration<br>China Brain Project<br>Future of Humanity Institute - Defunct Oxford interdisciplinary research study centre<br>General video game playing - Ability of expert system to play different games<br>Generative expert system - AI system efficient in producing content in action to prompts<br>Human Brain Project - Scientific research task<br>Intelligence amplification - Use of details innovation to enhance human intelligence (IA).<br>Machine ethics - Moral behaviours of manufactured makers.<br>Moravec's paradox.<br>Multi-task learning - Solving multiple device finding out tasks at the very same time.<br>Neural scaling law - Statistical law in artificial intelligence.<br>Outline of synthetic intelligence - Overview of and topical guide to artificial intelligence.<br>Transhumanism - Philosophical motion.<br>Synthetic intelligence - Alternate term for or form of artificial intelligence.<br>Transfer knowing - Machine knowing technique.<br>Loebner Prize - Annual [http://stockzero.net AI] competitors.<br>Hardware for synthetic intelligence - Hardware specifically developed and enhanced for synthetic intelligence.<br>Weak expert system - Form of artificial intelligence.<br><br><br>Notes<br><br><br>^ a b See listed below for the origin of the term "strong AI", and see the academic meaning of "strong AI" and weak AI in the article Chinese space.<br>^ [https://pahadisamvad.com AI] founder John McCarthy writes: "we can not yet identify in general what sort of computational treatments we wish to call intelligent. " [26] (For a conversation of some definitions of intelligence used by artificial intelligence researchers, see viewpoint of artificial intelligence.).<br>^ The Lighthill report particularly criticized [https://www.photoartistweb.nl AI]'s "grand objectives" and led the dismantling of [https://www.philiphillbooks.com AI] research study in England. [55] In the U.S., DARPA became identified to fund only "mission-oriented direct research study, rather than fundamental undirected research study". [56] [57] ^ As AI founder John McCarthy composes "it would be a terrific relief to the rest of the workers in AI if the inventors of brand-new general formalisms would express their hopes in a more secured form than has sometimes been the case." [61] ^ In "Mind Children" [122] 1015 cps is utilized. More just recently, in 1997, [123] Moravec argued for 108 MIPS which would roughly correspond to 1014 cps. Moravec talks in regards to MIPS, not "cps", which is a non-standard term Kurzweil introduced.<br>^ As specified in a standard AI textbook: "The assertion that machines could potentially act wisely (or, maybe much better, act as if they were smart) is called the 'weak AI' hypothesis by theorists, and the assertion that devices that do so are really believing (instead of mimicing thinking) is called the 'strong AI' hypothesis." [121] ^ Alan Turing made this point in 1950. [36] References<br><br><br>^ Krishna, Sri (9 February 2023). "What is synthetic narrow intelligence (ANI)?". VentureBeat. Retrieved 1 March 2024. ANI is developed to carry out a single task.<br>^ "OpenAI Charter". OpenAI. Retrieved 6 April 2023. Our mission is to guarantee that artificial basic intelligence benefits all of humankind.<br>^ Heath, Alex (18 January 2024). "Mark Zuckerberg's new objective is developing artificial basic intelligence". The Verge. Retrieved 13 June 2024. Our vision is to construct AI that is much better than human-level at all of the human senses.<br>^ Baum, Seth D. (2020 ). A Study of Artificial General Intelligence Projects for Ethics, Risk, and Policy (PDF) (Report). Global Catastrophic Risk Institute. Retrieved 28 November 2024. 72 AGI R&D tasks were recognized as being active in 2020.<br>^ a b c "[https://www.podereirovai.it AI] timelines: What do specialists in expert system expect for the future?". Our World in Data. Retrieved 6 April 2023.<br>^ Metz, Cade (15 May 2023). "Some Researchers Say A.I. Is Already Here, Stirring Debate in Tech Circles". The New York Times. Retrieved 18 May 2023.<br>^ "AI pioneer Geoffrey Hinton  and alerts of danger ahead". The New York City Times. 1 May 2023. Retrieved 2 May 2023. It is tough to see how you can avoid the bad actors from utilizing it for bad things.<br>^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric (2023 ). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early explores GPT-4". arXiv preprint. arXiv:2303.12712. GPT-4 reveals sparks of AGI.<br>^ Butler, Octavia E. (1993 ). Parable of the Sower. Grand Central Publishing. ISBN 978-0-4466-7550-5. All that you touch you change. All that you change modifications you.<br>^ Vinge, Vernor (1992 ). A Fire Upon the Deep. Tor Books. ISBN 978-0-8125-1528-2. The Singularity is coming.<br>^ Morozov, Evgeny (30 June 2023). "The True Threat of Artificial Intelligence". The New York Times. The real hazard is not AI itself however the way we deploy it.<br>^ "Impressed by artificial intelligence? Experts say AGI is coming next, and it has 'existential' threats". ABC News. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 6 April 2023. AGI might pose existential threats to humankind.<br>^ Bostrom, Nick (2014 ). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2. The very first superintelligence will be the last innovation that humankind needs to make.<br>^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). "A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn". The New York Times. Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be an international concern.<br>^ "Statement on AI Risk". Center for AI Safety. Retrieved 1 March 2024. [https://climbforacure.net AI] experts caution of risk of extinction from AI.<br>^ Mitchell, Melanie (30 May 2023). "Are AI's Doomsday Scenarios Worth Taking Seriously?". The New York Times. We are far from producing makers that can outthink us in basic ways.<br>^ LeCun, Yann (June 2023). "AGI does not provide an existential threat". Medium. There is no reason to fear [http://cuzcocom.free.fr AI] as an existential risk.<br>^ Kurzweil 2005, p. 260.<br>^ a b Kurzweil, Ray (5 August 2005), "Long Live AI", Forbes, archived from the initial on 14 August 2005: Kurzweil explains strong AI as "device intelligence with the full range of human intelligence.".<br>^ "The Age of Expert System: George John at TEDxLondonBusinessSchool 2013". Archived from the initial on 26 February 2014. Retrieved 22 February 2014.<br>^ Newell & Simon 1976, This is the term they use for "human-level" intelligence in the physical sign system hypothesis.<br>^ "The Open University on Strong and Weak [https://eyris.de AI]". Archived from the original on 25 September 2009. Retrieved 8 October 2007.<br>^ "What is synthetic superintelligence (ASI)?|Definition from TechTarget". Enterprise AI. Retrieved 8 October 2023.<br>^ "Artificial intelligence is transforming our world - it is on everybody to ensure that it goes well". Our World in Data. Retrieved 8 October 2023.<br>^ Dickson, Ben (16 November 2023). "Here is how far we are to achieving AGI, according to DeepMind". VentureBeat.<br>^ McCarthy, John (2007a). "Basic Questions". Stanford University. Archived from the original on 26 October 2007. Retrieved 6 December 2007.<br>^ This list of smart characteristics is based on the topics covered by significant AI books, including: Russell & Norvig 2003, Luger & Stubblefield 2004, Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998 and Nilsson 1998.<br>^ Johnson 1987.<br>^ de Charms, R. (1968 ). Personal causation. New York: Academic Press.<br>^ a b Pfeifer, R. and Bongard J. C., How the body shapes the way we believe: a brand-new view of intelligence (The MIT Press, 2007). ISBN 0-2621-6239-3.<br>^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reassessed: The idea of competence". Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966.<br>^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reassessed: The principle of competence". Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966.<br>^ Muehlhauser, Luke (11 August 2013). "What is AGI?". Machine Intelligence Research Institute. Archived from the original on 25 April 2014. Retrieved 1 May 2014.<br>^ "What is Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)?|4 Tests For Ensuring Artificial General Intelligence". Talky Blog. 13 July 2019. Archived from the original on 17 July 2019. Retrieved 17 July 2019.<br>^ Kirk-Giannini, Cameron Domenico; Goldstein, Simon (16 October 2023). "AI is closer than ever to passing the Turing test for 'intelligence'. What takes place when it does?". The Conversation. Retrieved 22 September 2024.<br>^ a b Turing 1950.<br>^ Turing, Alan (1952 ). B. Jack Copeland (ed.). Can Automatic Calculating Machines Be Said To Think?. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 487-506. ISBN 978-0-1982-5079-1.<br>^ "Eugene Goostman is a genuine young boy - the Turing Test says so". The Guardian. 9 June 2014. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ "Scientists challenge whether computer 'Eugene Goostman' passed Turing test". BBC News. 9 June 2014. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Jones, Cameron R.; Bergen, Benjamin K. (9 May 2024). "People can not differentiate GPT-4 from a human in a Turing test". arXiv:2405.08007 [cs.HC]<br>^ Varanasi, Lakshmi (21 March 2023). "AI designs like ChatGPT and GPT-4 are acing whatever from the bar exam to AP Biology. Here's a list of challenging examinations both AI variations have actually passed". Business Insider. Retrieved 30 May 2023.<br>^ Naysmith, Caleb (7 February 2023). "6 Jobs Artificial Intelligence Is Already Replacing and How Investors Can Capitalize on It". Retrieved 30 May 2023.<br>^ Turk, Victoria (28 January 2015). "The Plan to Replace the Turing Test with a 'Turing Olympics'". Vice. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Gopani, Avi (25 May 2022). "Turing Test is undependable. The Winograd Schema is outdated. Coffee is the answer". Analytics India Magazine. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Bhaimiya, Sawdah (20 June 2023). "DeepMind's co-founder recommended testing an AI chatbot's capability to turn $100,000 into $1 million to measure human-like intelligence". Business Insider. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Suleyman, Mustafa (14 July 2023). "Mustafa Suleyman: My new Turing test would see if AI can make $1 million". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Shapiro, Stuart C. (1992 ). "Artificial Intelligence" (PDF). In Stuart C. Shapiro (ed.). Encyclopedia of Expert System (Second ed.). New York City: John Wiley. pp. 54-57. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 February 2016. (Section 4 is on "[http://vgvel.no AI]-Complete Tasks".).<br>^ Yampolskiy, Roman V. (2012 ). Xin-She Yang (ed.). "Turing Test as a Defining Feature of AI-Completeness" (PDF). Artificial Intelligence, Evolutionary Computation and Metaheuristics (AIECM): 3-17. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 May 2013.<br>^ "[https://klaproos.be AI] Index: State of AI in 13 Charts". Stanford University Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence. 15 April 2024. Retrieved 27 May 2024.<br>^ Crevier 1993, pp. 48-50.<br>^ Kaplan, Andreas (2022 ). "Expert System, Business and Civilization - Our Fate Made in Machines". Archived from the initial on 6 May 2022. Retrieved 12 March 2022.<br>^ Simon 1965, p. 96 priced estimate in Crevier 1993, p. 109.<br>^ "Scientist on the Set: An Interview with Marvin Minsky". Archived from the initial on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 5 April 2008.<br>^ Marvin Minsky to Darrach (1970 ), quoted in Crevier (1993, p. 109).<br>^ Lighthill 1973; Howe 1994.<br>^ a b NRC 1999, "Shift to Applied Research Increases Investment".<br>^ Crevier 1993, pp. 115-117; Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 21-22.<br>^ Crevier 1993, p. 211, Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 24 and see likewise Feigenbaum & McCorduck 1983.<br>^ Crevier 1993, pp. 161-162, 197-203, 240; Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 25.<br>^ Crevier 1993, pp. 209-212.<br>^ McCarthy, John (2000 ). "Reply to Lighthill". Stanford University. Archived from the initial on 30 September 2008. Retrieved 29 September 2007.<br>^ Markoff, John (14 October 2005). "Behind Artificial Intelligence, a Squadron of Bright Real People". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2 February 2023. Retrieved 18 February 2017. At its low point, some computer system researchers and software engineers avoided the term artificial intelligence for fear of being deemed wild-eyed dreamers.<br>^ Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 25-26<br>^ "Trends in the Emerging Tech Hype Cycle". Gartner Reports. Archived from the initial on 22 May 2019. Retrieved 7 May 2019.<br>^ a b Moravec 1988, p. 20<br>^ Harnad, S. (1990 ). "The Symbol Grounding Problem". Physica D. 42 (1-3): 335-346. arXiv: cs/9906002. Bibcode:1990 PhyD ... 42..335 H. doi:10.1016/ 0167-2789( 90 )90087-6. S2CID 3204300.<br>^ Gubrud 1997<br>^ Hutter, Marcus (2005 ). Universal Artificial Intelligence: Sequential Decisions Based on Algorithmic Probability. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science an EATCS Series. Springer. doi:10.1007/ b138233. ISBN 978-3-5402-6877-2. S2CID 33352850. Archived from the original on 19 July 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2022.<br>^ Legg, Shane (2008 ). Machine Super Intelligence (PDF) (Thesis). University of Lugano. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 15 June 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2022.<br>^ Goertzel, Ben (2014 ). Artificial General Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Technology. Vol. 8598. Journal of Artificial General Intelligence. doi:10.1007/ 978-3-319-09274-4. ISBN 978-3-3190-9273-7. S2CID 8387410.<br>^ "Who coined the term "AGI"?". goertzel.org. Archived from the initial on 28 December 2018. Retrieved 28 December 2018., via Life 3.0: 'The term "AGI" was promoted by ... Shane Legg, Mark Gubrud and Ben Goertzel'<br>^ Wang & Goertzel 2007<br>^ "First International Summer School in Artificial General Intelligence, Main summertime school: June 22 - July 3, 2009, OpenCog Lab: July 6-9, 2009". Archived from the original on 28 September 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.<br>^ "Избираеми дисциплини 2009/2010 - пролетен триместър" [Elective courses 2009/2010 - spring trimester] Факултет по математика и информатика [Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics] (in Bulgarian). Archived from the initial on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.<br>^ "Избираеми дисциплини 2010/2011 - зимен триместър" [Elective courses 2010/2011 - winter trimester] Факултет по математика и информатика [Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics] (in Bulgarian). Archived from the initial on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.<br>^ Shevlin, Henry; Vold, Karina; Crosby, Matthew; Halina, Marta (4 October 2019). "The limitations of machine intelligence: Despite development in machine intelligence, artificial general intelligence is still a significant obstacle". EMBO Reports. 20 (10 ): e49177. doi:10.15252/ embr.201949177. ISSN 1469-221X. PMC 6776890. PMID 31531926.<br>^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric; Kamar, Ece; Lee, Peter; Lee, Yin Tat; Li, Yuanzhi; Lundberg, Scott; Nori, Harsha; Palangi, Hamid; Ribeiro, Marco Tulio; Zhang, Yi (27 March 2023). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early try outs GPT-4". arXiv:2303.12712 [cs.CL]<br>^ "Microsoft Researchers Claim GPT-4 Is Showing "Sparks" of AGI". Futurism. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 13 December 2023.<br>^ Allen, Paul; Greaves, Mark (12 October 2011). "The Singularity Isn't Near". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 17 September 2014.<br>^ Winfield, Alan. "Artificial intelligence will not become a Frankenstein's beast". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 17 September 2014. Retrieved 17 September 2014.<br>^ Deane, George (2022 ). "Machines That Feel and Think: The Role of Affective Feelings and Mental Action in (Artificial) General Intelligence". Artificial Life. 28 (3 ): 289-309. doi:10.1162/ artl_a_00368. ISSN 1064-5462. PMID 35881678. S2CID 251069071.<br>^ a b c Clocksin 2003.<br>^ Fjelland, Ragnar (17 June 2020). "Why general artificial intelligence will not be understood". Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 7 (1 ): 1-9. doi:10.1057/ s41599-020-0494-4. hdl:11250/ 2726984. ISSN 2662-9992. S2CID 219710554.<br>^ McCarthy 2007b.<br>^ Khatchadourian, Raffi (23 November 2015). "The Doomsday Invention: Will artificial intelligence bring us utopia or damage?". The New Yorker. Archived from the original on 28 January 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016.<br>^ Müller, V. C., & Bostrom, N. (2016 ). Future development in artificial intelligence: A survey of skilled opinion. In Fundamental concerns of expert system (pp. 555-572). Springer, Cham.<br>^ Armstrong, Stuart, and Kaj Sotala. 2012. "How We're Predicting AI-or Failing To." In Beyond AI: Artificial Dreams, edited by Jan Romportl, Pavel Ircing, Eva Žáčková, Michal Polák and Radek Schuster, 52-75. Plzeň: University of West Bohemia<br>^ "Microsoft Now Claims GPT-4 Shows 'Sparks' of General Intelligence". 24 March 2023.<br>^ Shimek, Cary (6 July 2023). "AI Outperforms Humans in Creativity Test". Neuroscience News. Retrieved 20 October 2023.<br>^ Guzik, Erik E.; Byrge, Christian; Gilde, Christian (1 December 2023). "The originality of devices: [https://iinnsource.com AI] takes the Torrance Test". Journal of Creativity. 33 (3 ): 100065. doi:10.1016/ j.yjoc.2023.100065. ISSN 2713-3745. S2CID 261087185.<br>^ Arcas, Blaise Agüera y (10 October 2023). "Artificial General Intelligence Is Already Here". Noema.<br>^ Zia, Tehseen (8 January 2024). "Unveiling of Large Multimodal Models: Shaping the Landscape of Language Models in 2024". Unite.ai. Retrieved 26 May 2024.<br>^ "Introducing OpenAI o1-preview". OpenAI. 12 September 2024.<br>^ Knight, Will. "OpenAI Announces a New AI Model, Code-Named Strawberry, That Solves Difficult Problems Step by Step". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 17 September 2024.<br>^ "OpenAI Employee Claims AGI Has Been Achieved". Orbital Today. 13 December 2024. Retrieved 27 December 2024.<br>^ "AI Index: State of AI in 13 Charts". hai.stanford.edu. 15 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024.<br>^ "Next-Gen AI: OpenAI and Meta's Leap Towards Reasoning Machines". Unite.[https://best-peregovory.ru ai]. 19 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024.<br>^ James, Alex P. (2022 ). "The Why, What, and How of Artificial General Intelligence Chip Development". IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems. 14 (2 ): 333-347. arXiv:2012.06338. doi:10.1109/ TCDS.2021.3069871. ISSN 2379-8920. S2CID 228376556. Archived from the initial on 28 August 2022. Retrieved 28 August 2022.<br>^ Pei, Jing; Deng, Lei; Song, Sen; Zhao, Mingguo; Zhang, Youhui; Wu, Shuang; Wang, Guanrui; Zou, Zhe; Wu, Zhenzhi; He, Wei; Chen, Feng; Deng, Ning; Wu, Si; Wang, Yu; Wu, Yujie (2019 ). "Towards artificial general intelligence with hybrid Tianjic chip architecture". Nature. 572 (7767 ): 106-111. Bibcode:2019 Natur.572..106 P. doi:10.1038/ s41586-019-1424-8. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 31367028. S2CID 199056116. Archived from the original on 29 August 2022. Retrieved 29 August 2022.<br>^ Pandey, Mohit; Fernandez, Michael; Gentile, Francesco; Isayev, Olexandr; Tropsha, Alexander; Stern, Abraham C.; Cherkasov, Artem (March 2022). "The transformational role of GPU computing and deep knowing in drug discovery". Nature Machine Intelligence. 4 (3 ): 211-221. doi:10.1038/ s42256-022-00463-x. ISSN 2522-5839. S2CID 252081559.<br>^ Goertzel & Pennachin 2006.<br>^ a b c (Kurzweil 2005, p. 260).<br>^ a b c Goertzel 2007.<br>^ Grace, Katja (2016 ). "Error in Armstrong and Sotala 2012". AI Impacts (blog site). Archived from the original on 4 December 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020.<br>^ a b Butz, Martin V. (1 March 2021). "Towards Strong [https://www.kentturktv.com AI]". KI - Künstliche Intelligenz. 35 (1 ): 91-101. doi:10.1007/ s13218-021-00705-x. ISSN 1610-1987. S2CID 256065190.<br>^ Liu, Feng; Shi, Yong; Liu, Ying (2017 ). "Intelligence Quotient and Intelligence Grade of Artificial Intelligence". Annals of Data Science. 4 (2 ): 179-191. arXiv:1709.10242. doi:10.1007/ s40745-017-0109-0. S2CID 37900130.<br>^ Brien, Jörn (5 October 2017). "Google-KI doppelt so schlau wie Siri" [Google AI is two times as wise as Siri - however a six-year-old beats both] (in German). Archived from the original on 3 January 2019. Retrieved 2 January 2019.<br>^ Grossman, Gary (3 September 2020). "We're entering the [https://actu-info.fr AI] twilight zone between narrow and basic [http://deepsingularity.io AI]". VentureBeat. Archived from the initial on 4 September 2020. Retrieved 5 September 2020. Certainly, too, there are those who claim we are currently seeing an early example of an AGI system in the recently announced GPT-3 natural language processing (NLP) neural network. ... So is GPT-3 the very first example of an AGI system? This is arguable, however the agreement is that it is not AGI. ... If nothing else, GPT-3 tells us there is a happy medium between narrow and general [http://enjoyablue.com AI].<br>^ Quach, Katyanna. "A developer constructed an [https://davidbogie.co.uk AI] chatbot utilizing GPT-3 that helped a male speak once again to his late fiancée. OpenAI shut it down". The Register. Archived from the initial on 16 October 2021. Retrieved 16 October 2021.<br>^ Wiggers, Kyle (13 May 2022), "DeepMind's brand-new [https://www.tharungardens.com AI] can perform over 600 tasks, from playing video games to managing robots", TechCrunch, archived from the original on 16 June 2022, retrieved 12 June 2022.<br>^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric; Kamar, Ece; Lee, Peter; Lee, Yin Tat; Li, Yuanzhi; Lundberg, Scott; Nori, Harsha; Palangi, Hamid; Ribeiro, Marco Tulio; Zhang, Yi (22 March 2023). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early explores GPT-4". arXiv:2303.12712 [cs.CL]<br>^ Metz, Cade (1 May 2023). "' The Godfather of A.I.' Leaves Google and Warns of Danger Ahead". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ Bove, Tristan. "A.I. could equal human intelligence in 'just a few years,' says CEO of Google's primary A.I. research study lab". Fortune. Retrieved 4 September 2024.<br>^ Nellis, Stephen (2 March 2024). "Nvidia CEO states AI might pass human tests in five years". Reuters. ^ Aschenbrenner, Leopold. "SITUATIONAL AWARENESS, The Decade Ahead".<br>^ Sullivan, Mark (18 October 2023). "Why everyone seems to disagree on how to define Artificial General Intelligence". Fast Company.<br>^ Nosta, John (5 January 2024). "The Accelerating Path to Artificial General Intelligence". Psychology Today. Retrieved 30 March 2024.<br>^ Hickey, Alex. "Whole Brain Emulation: A Giant Step for Neuroscience". Tech Brew. Retrieved 8 November 2023.<br>^ Sandberg & Boström 2008.<br>^ Drachman 2005.<br>^ a b Russell & Norvig 2003.<br>^ Moravec 1988, p. 61.<br>^ Moravec 1998.<br>^ Holmgaard Mersh, Amalie (15 September 2023). "Decade-long European research study task maps the human brain". euractiv.<br>^ Swaminathan, Nikhil (January-February 2011). "Glia-the other brain cells". Discover. Archived from the initial on 8 February 2014. Retrieved 24 January 2014.<br>^ de Vega, Glenberg & Graesser 2008. A wide variety of views in current research study, all of which need grounding to some degree<br>^ Thornton, Angela (26 June 2023). "How submitting our minds to a computer might become possible". The Conversation. Retrieved 8 November 2023.<br>^ Searle 1980<br>^ For instance: Russell & Norvig 2003,<br>Oxford University Press Dictionary of Psychology Archived 3 December 2007 at the Wayback Machine (priced quote in" Encyclopedia.com"),.<br>MIT Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science Archived 19 July 2008 at the Wayback Machine (priced estimate in "AITopics"),.<br>Will Biological Computers Enable Artificially Intelligent Machines to Become Persons? Archived 13 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine Anthony Tongen.<br><br><br><br><br>^ a b c Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 947.<br>^ though see Explainable synthetic intelligence for interest by the field about why a program acts the method it does.<br>^ Chalmers, David J. (9 August 2023). "Could a Large Language Model Be Conscious?". Boston Review.<br>^ Seth, Anil. "Consciousness". New Scientist. Retrieved 5 September 2024.<br>^ Nagel 1974.<br>^ "The Google engineer who thinks the company's AI has come to life". The Washington Post. 11 June 2022. Retrieved 12 June 2023.<br>^ Kateman, Brian (24 July 2023). "[http://behappy.blog.rs AI] Should Be Terrified of Humans". TIME. Retrieved 5 September 2024.<br>^ Nosta, John (18 December 2023). "Should Expert System Have Rights?". Psychology Today. Retrieved 5 September 2024.<br>^ Akst, Daniel (10 April 2023). "Should Robots With Artificial Intelligence Have Moral or Legal Rights?". The Wall Street Journal.<br>^ "Artificial General Intelligence - Do [es] the expense surpass advantages?". 23 August 2021. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ "How we can Gain from Advancing Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) - Unite.AI". www.unite.ai. 7 April 2020. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ a b c Talty, Jules; Julien, Stephan. "What Will Our Society Appear Like When Expert System Is Everywhere?". Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ a b Stevenson, Matt (8 October 2015). "Answers to Stephen Hawking's AMA are Here!". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ a b Bostrom, Nick (2017 ). " § Preferred order of arrival". Superintelligence: courses, threats, methods (Reprinted with corrections 2017 ed.). Oxford, United Kingdom; New York, New York, USA: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2.<br>^ Piper, Kelsey (19 November 2018). "How technological progress is making it likelier than ever that people will destroy ourselves". Vox. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ Doherty, Ben (17 May 2018). "Climate alter an 'existential security danger' to Australia, Senate questions says". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 16 July 2023.<br>^ MacAskill, William (2022 ). What we owe the future. New York, NY: Basic Books. ISBN 978-1-5416-1862-6.<br>^ a b Ord, Toby (2020 ). "Chapter 5: Future Risks, Unaligned Expert System". The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5266-0021-9.<br>^ Al-Sibai, Noor (13 February 2022). "OpenAI Chief Scientist Says Advanced AI May Already Be Conscious". Futurism. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ Samuelsson, Paul Conrad (2019 ). "Artificial Consciousness: Our Greatest Ethical Challenge". Philosophy Now. Retrieved 23 December 2023.<br>^ Kateman, Brian (24 July 2023). "AI Should Be Terrified of Humans". TIME. Retrieved 23 December 2023.<br>^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). "A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn". The New York City Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ a b "Statement on [http://clairgloria.com AI] Risk". Center for [http://esk-cityfinanz.de AI] Safety. 30 May 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ "Stephen Hawking: 'Transcendence looks at the implications of expert system - but are we taking AI seriously enough?'". The Independent (UK). Archived from the initial on 25 September 2015. Retrieved 3 December 2014.<br>^ Herger, Mario. "The Gorilla Problem - Enterprise Garage". Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ "The remarkable Facebook argument in between Yann LeCun, Stuart Russel and Yoshua Bengio about the dangers of strong AI". The interesting Facebook dispute in between Yann LeCun, Stuart Russel and Yoshua Bengio about the risks of strong AI (in French). Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ "Will Artificial Intelligence Doom The Mankind Within The Next 100 Years?". HuffPost. 22 August 2014. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ Sotala, Kaj; Yampolskiy, Roman V. (19 December 2014). "Responses to devastating AGI danger: a survey". Physica Scripta. 90 (1 ): 018001. doi:10.1088/ 0031-8949/90/ 1/018001. ISSN 0031-8949.<br>^ Bostrom, Nick (2014 ). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (First ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2.<br>^ Chow, Andrew R.; Perrigo, Billy (16 February 2023). "The AI Arms Race Is On. Start Worrying". TIME. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ Tetlow, Gemma (12 January 2017). "[http://allumeurs-de-reverberes.fr AI] arms race dangers spiralling out of control, report warns". Financial Times. Archived from the initial on 11 April 2022. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ Milmo, Dan; Stacey, Kiran (25 September 2023). "Experts disagree over danger presented however expert system can not be ignored". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ "Humanity, Security & AI, Oh My! (with Ian Bremmer & Shuman Ghosemajumder)". CAFE. 20 July 2023. Retrieved 15 September 2023.<br>^ Hamblin, James (9 May 2014). "But What Would completion of Humanity Mean for Me?". The Atlantic. Archived from the initial on 4 June 2014. Retrieved 12 December 2015.<br>^ Titcomb, James (30 October 2023). "Big Tech is stiring fears over AI, caution scientists". The Telegraph. Retrieved 7 December 2023.<br>^ Davidson, John (30 October 2023). "Google Brain creator states huge tech is lying about AI extinction risk". Australian Financial Review. Archived from the initial on 7 December 2023. Retrieved 7 December 2023.<br>^ Eloundou, Tyna; Manning, Sam; Mishkin, Pamela; Rock, Daniel (17 March 2023). "GPTs are GPTs: An early look at the labor market impact potential of large language designs". OpenAI. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ a b Hurst, Luke (23 March 2023). "OpenAI says 80% of workers could see their tasks affected by [https://praxis-schahandeh.de AI]. These are the jobs most affected". euronews. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ Sheffey, Ayelet (20 August 2021). "Elon Musk states we need universal standard income since 'in the future, physical work will be an option'". Business Insider. Archived from the initial on 9 July 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>Sources<br><br><br>UNESCO Science Report: the Race Against Time for Smarter Development. Paris: UNESCO. 11 June 2021. ISBN 978-9-2310-0450-6. Archived from the original on 18 June 2022. Retrieved 22 September 2021.<br>Chalmers, David (1996 ), The Conscious Mind, Oxford University Press.<br>Clocksin, William (August 2003), "Artificial intelligence and the future", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, vol. 361, no. 1809, pp. 1721-1748, Bibcode:2003 RSPTA.361.1721 C, doi:10.1098/ rsta.2003.1232, PMID 12952683, S2CID 31032007.<br>Crevier, Daniel (1993 ). AI: The Tumultuous Search for Expert System. New York City, NY: BasicBooks. ISBN 0-465-02997-3.<br>Darrach, Brad (20 November 1970), "Meet Shakey, the First Electronic Person", Life Magazine, pp. 58-68.<br>Drachman, D. (2005 ), "Do we have brain to spare?", Neurology, 64 (12 ): 2004-2005, doi:10.1212/ 01. WNL.0000166914.38327. BB, PMID 15985565, S2CID 38482114.<br>Feigenbaum, Edward A.; McCorduck, Pamela (1983 ), The Fifth Generation: Artificial Intelligence and Japan's Computer Challenge to the World, Michael Joseph, ISBN 978-0-7181-2401-4.<br>Goertzel, Ben; Pennachin, Cassio, eds. (2006 ), Artificial General Intelligence (PDF), Springer, ISBN 978-3-5402-3733-4, archived from the initial (PDF) on 20 March 2013.<br>Goertzel, Ben (December 2007), "Human-level artificial general intelligence and the possibility of a technological singularity: a reaction to Ray Kurzweil's The Singularity Is Near, and McDermott's critique of Kurzweil", Expert system, vol. 171, no. 18, Special Review Issue, pp. 1161-1173, doi:10.1016/ j.artint.2007.10.011, archived from the original on 7 January 2016, retrieved 1 April 2009.<br>Gubrud, Mark (November 1997), "Nanotechnology and International Security", Fifth Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology, archived from the original on 29 May 2011, recovered 7 May 2011.<br>Howe, J. (November 1994), Expert System at Edinburgh University: a Point of view, archived from the original on 17 August 2007, obtained 30 August 2007.<br>Johnson, Mark (1987 ), The body in the mind, Chicago, ISBN 978-0-2264-0317-5.<br>Kurzweil, Ray (2005 ), The Singularity is Near, Viking Press.<br>Lighthill, Professor Sir James (1973 ), "Artificial Intelligence: A General Survey", Expert System: a paper seminar, Science Research Council.<br>Luger, George; Stubblefield, William (2004 ), Artificial Intelligence: Structures and Strategies for Complex Problem Solving (fifth ed.), The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., p. 720, ISBN 978-0-8053-4780-7.<br>McCarthy, John (2007b). What is Artificial Intelligence?. Stanford University. The supreme effort is to make computer programs that can resolve issues and achieve objectives in the world in addition to people.<br>Moravec, Hans (1988 ), Mind Children, Harvard University Press<br>Moravec, Hans (1998 ), "When will computer system hardware match the human brain?", Journal of Evolution and Technology, vol. 1, archived from the initial on 15 June 2006, obtained 23 June 2006<br>Nagel (1974 ), "What Is it Like to Be a Bat" (PDF), Philosophical Review, 83 (4 ): 435-50, doi:10.2307/ 2183914, JSTOR 2183914, archived (PDF) from the original on 16 October 2011, obtained 7 November 2009<br>Newell, Allen; Simon, H. A. (1976 ). "Computer Technology as Empirical Inquiry: Symbols and Search". Communications of the ACM. 19 (3 ): 113-126. doi:10.1145/ 360018.360022.<br>Nilsson, Nils (1998 ), Expert System: A New Synthesis, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, ISBN 978-1-5586-0467-4<br>NRC (1999 ), "Developments in Expert System", Funding a Transformation: Government Support for Computing Research, National Academy Press, archived from the initial on 12 January 2008, recovered 29 September 2007<br>Poole, David; Mackworth, Alan; Goebel, Randy (1998 ), Computational Intelligence: A Sensible Approach, New York City: Oxford University Press, archived from the initial on 25 July 2009, recovered 6 December 2007<br>Russell, Stuart J.; Norvig, Peter (2003 ), Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (second ed.), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-790395-2<br>Sandberg, Anders; Boström, Nick (2008 ), Whole Brain Emulation: A Roadmap (PDF), Technical Report # 2008-3, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University, archived (PDF) from the original on 25 March 2020, retrieved 5 April 2009<br>Searle, John (1980 ), "Minds, Brains and Programs" (PDF), Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3 (3 ): 417-457, doi:10.1017/ S0140525X00005756, S2CID 55303721, archived (PDF) from the original on 17 March 2019, obtained 3 September 2020<br>Simon, H. A. (1965 ), The Shape of Automation for Men and Management, New York: Harper & Row<br>Turing, Alan (October 1950). "Computing Machinery and Intelligence". Mind. 59 (236 ): 433-460. doi:10.1093/ mind/LIX.236.433. ISSN 1460-2113. JSTOR 2251299. S2CID 14636783.<br><br><br>de Vega, Manuel; Glenberg, Arthur; Graesser, Arthur, eds. (2008 ), Symbols and Embodiment: Debates on significance and cognition, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-1992-1727-4<br>Wang, Pei; Goertzel, Ben (2007 ). "Introduction: Aspects of Artificial General Intelligence". Advances in Artificial General Intelligence: Concepts, Architectures and Algorithms: Proceedings of the AGI Workshop 2006. IOS Press. pp. 1-16. ISBN 978-1-5860-3758-1. Archived from the original on 18 February 2021. Retrieved 13 December 2020 - by means of ResearchGate.<br><br><br>Further reading<br><br><br>Aleksander, Igor (1996 ), Impossible Minds, World Scientific Publishing Company, ISBN 978-1-8609-4036-1<br>Azevedo FA, Carvalho LR, Grinberg LT, Farfel J, et al. (April 2009), "Equal numbers of neuronal and nonneuronal cells make the human brain an isometrically scaled-up primate brain", The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 513 (5 ): 532-541, doi:10.1002/ cne.21974, PMID 19226510, S2CID 5200449, archived from the original on 18 February 2021, recovered 4 September 2013 - via ResearchGate<br>Berglas, Anthony (January 2012) [2008], Artificial Intelligence Will Kill Our Grandchildren (Singularity), archived from the initial on 23 July 2014, retrieved 31 August 2012<br>Cukier, Kenneth, "Ready for Robots? How to Think of the Future of AI", Foreign Affairs, vol. 98, no. 4 (July/August 2019), pp. 192-98. George Dyson, historian of computing, composes (in what may be called "Dyson's Law") that "Any system easy adequate to be understandable will not be made complex enough to behave wisely, while any system complicated enough to act intelligently will be too complicated to understand." (p. 197.) Computer researcher Alex Pentland writes: "Current AI machine-learning algorithms are, at their core, dead simple foolish. They work, however they work by strength." (p. 198.).<br>Gelernter, David, Dream-logic, the Internet and Artificial Thought, Edge, archived from the original on 26 July 2010, retrieved 25 July 2010.<br>Gleick, James, "The Fate of Free Choice" (review of Kevin J. Mitchell, Free Agents: How Evolution Gave Us Free Will, Princeton University Press, 2023, 333 pp.), The New York City Review of Books, vol. LXXI, no. 1 (18 January 2024), pp. 27-28, 30. "Agency is what differentiates us from makers. For biological animals, factor and function come from acting worldwide and experiencing the consequences. Expert systems - disembodied, complete strangers to blood, sweat, and tears - have no celebration for that." (p. 30.).<br>Halal, William E. "TechCast Article Series: The Automation of Thought" (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on 6 June 2013.<br>- Halpern, Sue, "The Coming Tech Autocracy" (review of Verity Harding, [https://www.sglab.com AI] Needs You: How We Can Change AI's Future and Save Our Own, Princeton University Press, 274 pp.; Gary Marcus, Taming Silicon Valley: How We Can Ensure That [https://streetwiseworld.com.ng AI] Works for Us, MIT Press, 235 pp.; Daniela Rus and Gregory Mone, The Mind's Mirror: Risk and Reward in the Age of [https://a-step-closer.com AI], Norton, 280 pp.; Madhumita Murgia, Code Dependent: Living in the Shadow of AI, Henry Holt, 311 pp.), The New York Review of Books, vol. LXXI, no. 17 (7 November 2024), pp. 44-46. "' We can't realistically anticipate that those who want to get rich from AI are going to have the interests of the rest of us close at heart,' ... writes [Gary Marcus] 'We can't count on federal governments driven by campaign finance contributions [from tech business] to push back.' ... Marcus details the needs that citizens must make of their governments and the tech business. They include openness on how AI systems work; settlement for individuals if their information [are] utilized to train LLMs (large language design) s and the right to grant this usage; and the ability to hold tech business liable for the damages they bring on by getting rid of Section 230, enforcing cash penalites, and passing stricter product liability laws ... Marcus also recommends ... that a brand-new, [https://git.technologistsguild.org AI]-specific federal agency, comparable to the FDA, the FCC, or the FTC, may supply the most robust oversight ... [T] he Fordham law teacher Chinmayi Sharma ... recommends ... establish [ing] an expert licensing program for engineers that would work in a comparable method to medical licenses, malpractice matches, and the Hippocratic oath in medicine. 'What if, like medical professionals,' she asks ..., 'AI engineers also pledged to do no damage?'" (p. 46.).<br>Holte, R. C.; Choueiry, B. Y. (2003 ), "Abstraction and reformulation in synthetic intelligence", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, vol. 358, no. 1435, pp. 1197-1204, doi:10.1098/ rstb.2003.1317, PMC 1693218, PMID 12903653.<br>Hughes-Castleberry, Kenna, "A Murder Mystery Puzzle: The literary puzzle Cain's Jawbone, which has stumped human beings for years, reveals the limitations of natural-language-processing algorithms", Scientific American, vol. 329, no. 4 (November 2023), pp. 81-82. "This murder mystery competition has revealed that although NLP (natural-language processing) designs can incredible feats, their capabilities are quite restricted by the quantity of context they get. This [...] might cause [troubles] for scientists who intend to utilize them to do things such as analyze ancient languages. In many cases, there are couple of historic records on long-gone civilizations to serve as training data for such a purpose." (p. 82.).<br>Immerwahr, Daniel, "Your Lying Eyes: People now utilize A.I. to produce fake videos equivalent from real ones. Just how much does it matter?", The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 54-59. "If by 'deepfakes' we imply practical videos produced utilizing synthetic intelligence that really deceive individuals, then they hardly exist. The phonies aren't deep, and the deeps aren't fake. [...] A.I.-generated videos are not, in basic, operating in our media as counterfeited evidence. Their role much better resembles that of cartoons, particularly smutty ones." (p. 59.).<br>- Leffer, Lauren, "The Risks of Trusting AI: We must prevent humanizing machine-learning models utilized in clinical research", Scientific American, vol. 330, no. 6 (June 2024), pp. 80-81.<br>Lepore, Jill, "The Chit-Chatbot: Is talking with a maker a conversation?", The New Yorker, 7 October 2024, pp. 12-16.<br>Marcus, Gary, "Artificial Confidence: Even the newest, buzziest systems of artificial general intelligence are stymmied by the exact same old problems", Scientific American, vol. 327, no. 4 (October 2022), pp. 42-45.<br>McCarthy, John (October 2007), "From here to human-level AI", Artificial Intelligence, 171 (18 ): 1174-1182, doi:10.1016/ j.artint.2007.10.009.<br>McCorduck, Pamela (2004 ), Machines Who Think (2nd ed.), Natick, Massachusetts: A. K. Peters, ISBN 1-5688-1205-1.<br>Moravec, Hans (1976 ), The Role of Raw Power in Intelligence, archived from the original on 3 March 2016, retrieved 29 September 2007.<br>Newell, Allen; Simon, H. A. (1963 ), "GPS: A Program that Simulates Human Thought", in Feigenbaum, E. A.; Feldman, J. (eds.), Computers and Thought, New York City: McGraw-Hill.<br>Omohundro, Steve (2008 ), The Nature of Self-Improving Artificial Intelligence, provided and dispersed at the 2007 Singularity Summit, San Francisco, California.<br>Press, Eyal, "In Front of Their Faces: Does facial-recognition innovation lead authorities to overlook inconsistent proof?", The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 20-26.<br>Roivainen, Eka, "[https://www.joeboerg.de AI]'s IQ: ChatGPT aced a [basic intelligence] test however showed that intelligence can not be determined by IQ alone", Scientific American, vol. 329, no. 1 (July/August 2023), p. 7. "Despite its high IQ, ChatGPT stops working at tasks that require genuine humanlike thinking or an understanding of the physical and social world ... ChatGPT seemed not able to factor realistically and tried to rely on its huge database of ... realities stemmed from online texts. "<br>- Scharre, Paul, "Killer Apps: The Real Dangers of an AI Arms Race", Foreign Affairs, vol. 98, no. 3 (May/June 2019), pp. 135-44. "Today's AI technologies are powerful however undependable. Rules-based systems can not deal with circumstances their programmers did not anticipate. Learning systems are restricted by the data on which they were trained. AI failures have currently led to tragedy. Advanced auto-pilot features in cars and trucks, although they perform well in some scenarios, have driven cars and trucks without warning into trucks, concrete barriers, and parked vehicles. In the incorrect scenario, [https://nemoserver.iict.bas.bg AI] systems go from supersmart to superdumb in an immediate. When an opponent is attempting to manipulate and hack an AI system, the threats are even greater." (p. 140.).<br>Sutherland, J. G. (1990 ), "Holographic Model of Memory, Learning, and Expression", International Journal of Neural Systems, vol. 1-3, pp. 256-267.<br>- Vincent, James, "Horny Robot Baby Voice: James Vincent on AI chatbots", London Review of Books, vol. 46, no. 19 (10 October 2024), pp. 29-32." [AI chatbot] programs are made possible by brand-new innovations however rely on the timelelss human propensity to anthropomorphise." (p. 29.).<br>Williams, R. W.; Herrup, K.<br>
+
<br>Artificial basic intelligence (AGI) is a kind of expert system (AI) that matches or exceeds human cognitive abilities across a large range of cognitive jobs. This contrasts with narrow [https://www.silversonsongs.com AI], which is limited to particular tasks. [1] Artificial superintelligence (ASI), on the other hand, refers to AGI that considerably surpasses human cognitive abilities. AGI is considered one of the definitions of strong [https://shigeta-shohu.com AI].<br><br><br>Creating AGI is a main objective of AI research study and of companies such as OpenAI [2] and Meta. [3] A 2020 survey determined 72 active AGI research study and development projects across 37 countries. [4]<br><br>The timeline for attaining AGI remains a subject of continuous debate amongst researchers and experts. As of 2023, some argue that it might be possible in years or decades; others keep it may take a century or longer; a minority think it might never ever be accomplished; and another minority claims that it is currently here. [5] [6] Notable [http://lasersvejsning.dk AI] scientist Geoffrey Hinton has expressed concerns about the quick progress towards AGI, suggesting it might be attained sooner than lots of anticipate. [7]<br><br>There is debate on the specific definition of AGI and concerning whether modern large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 are early kinds of AGI. [8] AGI is a common topic in science fiction and futures research studies. [9] [10]<br><br>Contention exists over whether AGI represents an existential danger. [11] [12] [13] Many professionals on [http://passporttoparadise2016.com AI] have mentioned that reducing the threat of human termination presented by AGI ought to be a global concern. [14] [15] Others find the development of AGI to be too remote to present such a threat. [16] [17]<br><br>Terminology<br><br><br>AGI is also understood as strong AI, [18] [19] complete [http://helpearthlive.org AI], [20] human-level [https://play.hifriends.network AI], [5] human-level intelligent AI, or basic smart action. [21]<br><br>Some academic sources book the term "strong [https://paymentsspectrum.com AI]" for computer system programs that experience life or awareness. [a] On the other hand, weak AI (or narrow [https://www.sedel.mn AI]) has the ability to fix one specific issue but does not have basic cognitive capabilities. [22] [19] Some scholastic sources use "weak AI" to refer more broadly to any programs that neither experience awareness nor have a mind in the exact same sense as people. [a]<br><br>Related principles include synthetic superintelligence and transformative [https://transport-funerar-germania.ro AI]. An artificial superintelligence (ASI) is a theoretical type of AGI that is far more usually intelligent than people, [23] while the idea of transformative [https://xosowin.bet AI] relates to [https://suburbancorvettesofminnesota.com AI] having a large effect on society, for example, comparable to the farming or industrial revolution. [24]<br><br>A structure for categorizing AGI in levels was proposed in 2023 by Google DeepMind scientists. They specify 5 levels of AGI: emerging, competent, expert, virtuoso, and superhuman. For instance, a qualified AGI is specified as an AI that surpasses 50% of skilled grownups in a wide variety of non-physical tasks, and  [https://bphomesteading.com/forums/profile.php?id=20703 bphomesteading.com] a superhuman AGI (i.e. an artificial superintelligence) is similarly defined however with a limit of 100%. They consider big language designs like ChatGPT or LLaMA 2 to be instances of emerging AGI. [25]<br><br>Characteristics<br><br><br>Various popular definitions of intelligence have actually been proposed. Among the leading propositions is the Turing test. However,  [http://lespoetesbizarres.free.fr/fluxbb/profile.php?id=34862 lespoetesbizarres.free.fr] there are other widely known meanings, and some researchers disagree with the more popular approaches. [b]<br><br>Intelligence traits<br><br><br>Researchers normally hold that intelligence is needed to do all of the following: [27]<br><br>reason, use method, fix puzzles, and make judgments under unpredictability<br>represent understanding, including typical sense knowledge<br>plan<br>learn<br>- communicate in natural language<br>- if needed, integrate these skills in conclusion of any given objective<br><br><br>Many interdisciplinary methods (e.g. cognitive science, computational intelligence, and choice making) think about additional characteristics such as creativity (the capability to form unique psychological images and principles) [28] and autonomy. [29]<br><br>Computer-based systems that display a lot of these abilities exist (e.g. see computational creativity, automated thinking, decision support group, robotic, evolutionary computation, smart representative). There is debate about whether modern [http://45.55.138.82:3000 AI] systems possess them to an appropriate degree.<br> <br><br>Physical traits<br><br><br>Other capabilities are thought about preferable in smart systems, as they may impact intelligence or help in its expression. These consist of: [30]<br><br>- the ability to sense (e.g. see, hear, and so on), and<br>- the ability to act (e.g. relocation and control objects, change area to explore, and so on).<br><br><br>This consists of the capability to identify and react to danger. [31]<br><br>Although the capability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc) and the ability to act (e.g. move and manipulate things, modification location to explore, etc) can be preferable for some smart systems, [30] these physical capabilities are not strictly required for an entity to qualify as AGI-particularly under the thesis that large language models (LLMs) may currently be or become AGI. Even from a less optimistic viewpoint on LLMs, there is no firm requirement for an AGI to have a human-like type; being a silicon-based computational system is sufficient, offered it can process input (language) from the external world in location of human senses. This interpretation lines up with the understanding that AGI has actually never been proscribed a specific physical embodiment and thus does not require a capability for locomotion or traditional "eyes and ears". [32]<br><br>Tests for human-level AGI<br><br><br>Several tests suggested to validate human-level AGI have actually been thought about, including: [33] [34]<br><br>The concept of the test is that the machine has to try and pretend to be a man, by responding to concerns put to it, and it will just pass if the pretence is reasonably convincing. A significant portion of a jury, who must not be skilled about devices, should be taken in by the pretence. [37]<br><br>[http://fairviewumc.church AI]-complete issues<br><br><br>A problem is informally called "[https://www.ok-tonstudio.com AI]-complete" or "[https://the24watch.shop AI]-hard" if it is believed that in order to fix it, one would need to carry out AGI, because the solution is beyond the abilities of a purpose-specific algorithm. [47]<br><br>There are numerous issues that have been conjectured to need basic intelligence to resolve as well as people. Examples include computer vision, natural language understanding, and handling unexpected scenarios while resolving any real-world problem. [48] Even a specific job like translation needs a machine to check out and write in both languages, follow the author's argument (reason), comprehend the context (knowledge), and faithfully replicate the author's initial intent (social intelligence). All of these problems require to be resolved at the same time in order to reach human-level maker performance.<br><br><br>However, much of these tasks can now be performed by contemporary big language models. According to Stanford University's 2024 [http://bveinsbach.de AI] index, [https://gitlab.optitable.com AI] has actually reached human-level efficiency on numerous criteria for reading understanding and visual thinking. [49]<br><br>History<br><br><br>Classical [https://madevr.com AI]<br><br><br>Modern [http://havefotografi.dk AI] research study started in the mid-1950s. [50] The very first generation of [https://www.gengleonlus.org AI] researchers were persuaded that artificial general intelligence was possible which it would exist in just a couple of years. [51] [http://klappart.rothhaut.de AI] leader Herbert A. Simon composed in 1965: "machines will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a man can do." [52]<br><br>Their predictions were the motivation for Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke's character HAL 9000, who embodied what [http://blog.intergear.net AI] scientists thought they might develop by the year 2001. [http://voedenzo.nl AI] pioneer Marvin Minsky was a consultant [53] on the task of making HAL 9000 as reasonable as possible according to the consensus predictions of the time. He stated in 1967, "Within a generation ... the problem of creating 'synthetic intelligence' will considerably be solved". [54]<br><br>Several classical [http://www.mihagino-bc.com AI] projects, such as Doug Lenat's Cyc task (that began in 1984), and Allen Newell's Soar task, were directed at AGI.<br><br><br>However, in the early 1970s, it ended up being obvious that scientists had actually grossly ignored the trouble of the project. Funding firms became skeptical of AGI and put scientists under increasing pressure to produce useful "applied [http://www.chicago106miles.com AI]". [c] In the early 1980s, Japan's Fifth Generation Computer Project revived interest in AGI, setting out a ten-year timeline that consisted of AGI objectives like "carry on a table talk". [58] In reaction to this and the success of expert systems, both industry and government pumped money into the field. [56] [59] However, self-confidence in [https://pdict.eu AI] stunningly collapsed in the late 1980s, and the goals of the Fifth Generation Computer Project were never ever satisfied. [60] For the 2nd time in twenty years, [https://denjijapan.co.jp AI] researchers who anticipated the imminent accomplishment of AGI had actually been misinterpreted. By the 1990s, [http://iuec45.org AI] scientists had a reputation for making vain promises. They ended up being reluctant to make forecasts at all [d] and avoided mention of "human level" expert system for fear of being identified "wild-eyed dreamer [s]. [62]<br><br>Narrow [http://travelandfood.ru AI] research<br><br><br>In the 1990s and early 21st century, mainstream AI accomplished commercial success and academic respectability by focusing on particular sub-problems where [https://www.ok-tonstudio.com AI] can produce verifiable outcomes and commercial applications, such as speech recognition and suggestion algorithms. [63] These "applied AI" systems are now used extensively throughout the innovation market, and research study in this vein is greatly funded in both academic community and market. Since 2018 [update], advancement in this field was thought about an emerging pattern, and a fully grown stage was expected to be reached in more than ten years. [64]<br><br>At the turn of the century, lots of mainstream [https://ihinseiri-mokami.com AI] scientists [65] hoped that strong [https://www.siweul.net AI] could be established by combining programs that resolve various sub-problems. Hans Moravec composed in 1988:<br><br><br>I am positive that this bottom-up route to expert system will one day satisfy the conventional top-down route more than half method, ready to offer the real-world skills and the commonsense understanding that has been so frustratingly evasive in reasoning programs. Fully smart devices will result when the metaphorical golden spike is driven uniting the two efforts. [65]<br><br>However, even at the time, this was contested. For instance, Stevan Harnad of Princeton University concluded his 1990 paper on the symbol grounding hypothesis by specifying:<br><br><br>The expectation has actually often been voiced that "top-down" (symbolic) approaches to modeling cognition will somehow fulfill "bottom-up" (sensory) approaches somewhere in between. If the grounding factors to consider in this paper stand, then this expectation is hopelessly modular and there is truly just one practical path from sense to signs: from the ground up. A free-floating symbolic level like the software application level of a computer will never ever be reached by this path (or vice versa) - nor is it clear why we should even attempt to reach such a level, considering that it looks as if arriving would just amount to uprooting our symbols from their intrinsic significances (therefore simply reducing ourselves to the practical equivalent of a programmable computer). [66]<br><br>Modern artificial basic intelligence research<br><br><br>The term "artificial basic intelligence" was utilized as early as 1997, by Mark Gubrud [67] in a conversation of the ramifications of totally automated military production and operations. A mathematical formalism of AGI was proposed by Marcus Hutter in 2000. Named AIXI, the proposed AGI agent maximises "the capability to please goals in a vast array of environments". [68] This kind of AGI, defined by the capability to increase a mathematical definition of intelligence rather than exhibit human-like behaviour, [69] was likewise called universal expert system. [70]<br><br>The term AGI was re-introduced and promoted by Shane Legg and Ben Goertzel around 2002. [71] AGI research study activity in 2006 was described by Pei Wang and Ben Goertzel [72] as "producing publications and initial results". The very first summertime school in AGI was arranged in Xiamen, China in 2009 [73] by the Xiamen university's Artificial Brain Laboratory and OpenCog. The very first university course was provided in 2010 [74] and 2011 [75] at Plovdiv University, Bulgaria by Todor Arnaudov. MIT presented a course on AGI in 2018, arranged by Lex Fridman and featuring a variety of guest lecturers.<br><br><br>Since 2023 [upgrade], a small number of computer researchers are active in AGI research, and lots of add to a series of AGI conferences. However, progressively more researchers are interested in open-ended learning, [76] [77] which is the idea of permitting [http://doc.folib.com:3000 AI] to continuously learn and innovate like human beings do.<br><br><br>Feasibility<br><br><br>Since 2023, the development and potential accomplishment of AGI stays a subject of intense debate within the [http://cashman.wealthyson.biz AI] community. While traditional consensus held that AGI was a remote objective, current developments have actually led some scientists and industry figures to claim that early forms of AGI might already exist. [78] AI leader Herbert A. Simon hypothesized in 1965 that "makers will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a guy can do". This forecast stopped working to come true. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen thought that such intelligence is unlikely in the 21st century since it would need "unforeseeable and essentially unpredictable advancements" and a "clinically deep understanding of cognition". [79] Writing in The Guardian, roboticist Alan Winfield declared the gulf in between modern computing and human-level expert system is as broad as the gulf between existing area flight and useful faster-than-light spaceflight. [80]<br><br>An additional challenge is the lack of clearness in defining what intelligence entails. Does it require awareness? Must it show the ability to set objectives along with pursue them? Is it purely a matter of scale such that if model sizes increase adequately, intelligence will emerge? Are centers such as planning, reasoning, and causal understanding needed? Does intelligence require clearly duplicating the brain and its particular professors? Does it require feelings? [81]<br><br>Most [https://www.ateliertapisserie.fr AI] scientists think strong [https://www.archea.sk AI] can be achieved in the future, but some thinkers, like Hubert Dreyfus and Roger Penrose, reject the possibility of attaining strong [https://www.nasalapurebuildcon.com AI]. [82] [83] John McCarthy is amongst those who believe human-level [http://autodealer39.ru AI] will be achieved, however that today level of development is such that a date can not accurately be anticipated. [84] AI professionals' views on the expediency of AGI wax and wane. Four polls performed in 2012 and 2013 recommended that the average quote amongst specialists for when they would be 50% positive AGI would get here was 2040 to 2050, depending on the survey, with the mean being 2081. Of the experts, 16.5% addressed with "never ever" when asked the exact same question however with a 90% confidence rather. [85] [86] Further present AGI progress considerations can be found above Tests for confirming human-level AGI.<br><br><br>A report by Stuart Armstrong and Kaj Sotala of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute discovered that "over [a] 60-year time frame there is a strong predisposition towards anticipating the arrival of human-level [https://servicosvip.com AI] as between 15 and 25 years from the time the prediction was made". They evaluated 95 forecasts made between 1950 and 2012 on when human-level [http://webshopguetesiegel.de AI] will come about. [87]<br><br>In 2023, Microsoft researchers released a comprehensive assessment of GPT-4. They concluded: "Given the breadth and depth of GPT-4's abilities, our company believe that it could reasonably be viewed as an early (yet still incomplete) variation of an artificial basic intelligence (AGI) system." [88] Another research study in 2023 reported that GPT-4 exceeds 99% of humans on the Torrance tests of creativity. [89] [90]<br><br>Blaise Agüera y Arcas and Peter Norvig composed in 2023 that a significant level of general intelligence has actually currently been achieved with frontier designs. They composed that reluctance to this view comes from 4 main factors: a "healthy suspicion about metrics for AGI", an "ideological dedication to alternative [http://old.bingsurf.com AI] theories or methods", a "commitment to human (or biological) exceptionalism", or a "concern about the financial ramifications of AGI". [91]<br><br>2023 likewise marked the introduction of large multimodal designs (large language designs efficient in processing or producing multiple modalities such as text, audio, and images). [92]<br><br>In 2024, OpenAI launched o1-preview, the first of a series of models that "spend more time thinking before they respond". According to Mira Murati, this ability to believe before responding represents a new, additional paradigm. It enhances design outputs by investing more computing power when producing the response, whereas the design scaling paradigm enhances outputs by increasing the model size, training information and training calculate power. [93] [94]<br><br>An OpenAI worker, Vahid Kazemi, claimed in 2024 that the business had actually accomplished AGI, specifying, "In my viewpoint, we have currently achieved AGI and it's a lot more clear with O1." Kazemi clarified that while the [https://protheusadvpl.com.br AI] is not yet "much better than any human at any task", it is "better than the majority of people at most tasks." He also resolved criticisms that big language designs (LLMs) simply follow predefined patterns, comparing their learning procedure to the clinical method of observing, hypothesizing, and confirming. These statements have sparked dispute, as they depend on a broad and unconventional definition of AGI-traditionally comprehended as AI that matches human intelligence throughout all domains. Critics argue that, while OpenAI's models show remarkable adaptability, they may not fully fulfill this standard. Notably, Kazemi's comments came soon after OpenAI got rid of "AGI" from the regards to its partnership with Microsoft, prompting speculation about the business's tactical objectives. [95]<br><br>Timescales<br><br><br>Progress in expert system has actually traditionally gone through periods of fast development separated by periods when progress appeared to stop. [82] Ending each hiatus were fundamental advances in hardware, software application or both to develop area for further development. [82] [98] [99] For example, the hardware offered in the twentieth century was not sufficient to implement deep knowing, which requires large numbers of GPU-enabled CPUs. [100]<br><br>In the introduction to his 2006 book, [101] Goertzel states that price quotes of the time required before a really versatile AGI is constructed differ from 10 years to over a century. Since 2007 [update], the agreement in the AGI research neighborhood appeared to be that the timeline discussed by Ray Kurzweil in 2005 in The Singularity is Near [102] (i.e. in between 2015 and 2045) was possible. [103] Mainstream AI scientists have given a large range of opinions on whether development will be this rapid. A 2012 meta-analysis of 95 such viewpoints discovered a predisposition towards forecasting that the beginning of AGI would occur within 16-26 years for modern-day and historical forecasts alike. That paper has been criticized for how it categorized opinions as expert or non-expert. [104]<br><br>In 2012, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton developed a neural network called AlexNet, which won the ImageNet competition with a top-5 test mistake rate of 15.3%, considerably much better than the second-best entry's rate of 26.3% (the standard approach used a weighted sum of scores from different pre-defined classifiers). [105] AlexNet was considered the preliminary ground-breaker of the present deep knowing wave. [105]<br><br>In 2017, researchers Feng Liu, Yong Shi, and Ying Liu conducted intelligence tests on publicly readily available and freely available weak [https://onlyhostess.com AI] such as Google [https://www.vournascoffee.com AI], Apple's Siri, and others. At the optimum, these AIs reached an IQ value of about 47, which corresponds around to a six-year-old child in very first grade. An adult pertains to about 100 on average. Similar tests were performed in 2014, with the IQ score reaching an optimum worth of 27. [106] [107]<br><br>In 2020, OpenAI developed GPT-3, a language model capable of performing many varied tasks without particular training. According to Gary Grossman in a VentureBeat post, while there is agreement that GPT-3 is not an example of AGI, it is thought about by some to be too advanced to be categorized as a narrow [https://git.skyviewfund.com AI] system. [108]<br><br>In the exact same year, Jason Rohrer utilized his GPT-3 account to develop a chatbot, and provided a chatbot-developing platform called "Project December". OpenAI asked for changes to the chatbot to comply with their safety guidelines; Rohrer detached Project December from the GPT-3 API. [109]<br><br>In 2022, DeepMind developed Gato, a "general-purpose" system capable of carrying out more than 600 various tasks. [110]<br><br>In 2023, Microsoft Research published a study on an early version of OpenAI's GPT-4, competing that it displayed more basic intelligence than previous [http://www.xalonia-villas.com AI] models and showed human-level performance in tasks spanning several domains, such as mathematics, coding, and law. This research sparked a debate on whether GPT-4 could be considered an early, insufficient version of artificial basic intelligence, stressing the need for more expedition and assessment of such systems. [111]<br><br>In 2023, the [https://justintp.com AI] researcher Geoffrey Hinton mentioned that: [112]<br><br>The concept that this stuff could really get smarter than individuals - a few individuals believed that, [...] But the majority of people believed it was method off. And I believed it was way off. I believed it was 30 to 50 years or perhaps longer away. Obviously, I no longer think that.<br><br><br>In May 2023, Demis Hassabis similarly said that "The progress in the last couple of years has actually been pretty extraordinary", and that he sees no factor why it would slow down, expecting AGI within a years and even a couple of years. [113] In March 2024, Nvidia's CEO, Jensen Huang, specified his expectation that within five years, [https://sonlonginvest.vn AI] would can passing any test a minimum of in addition to human beings. [114] In June 2024, the AI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former OpenAI staff member, estimated AGI by 2027 to be "noticeably possible". [115]<br><br>Whole brain emulation<br><br><br>While the advancement of transformer designs like in ChatGPT is thought about the most promising course to AGI, [116] [117] entire brain emulation can act as an alternative technique. With entire brain simulation, a brain design is constructed by scanning and mapping a biological brain in information, and then copying and imitating it on a computer system or another computational gadget. The simulation model should be adequately devoted to the original, so that it behaves in almost the very same method as the original brain. [118] Whole brain emulation is a kind of brain simulation that is talked about in computational neuroscience and neuroinformatics, and for medical research study purposes. It has been gone over in synthetic intelligence research study [103] as an approach to strong [https://git.etrellium.com AI]. Neuroimaging innovations that could deliver the essential in-depth understanding are enhancing rapidly, and futurist Ray Kurzweil in the book The Singularity Is Near [102] forecasts that a map of adequate quality will appear on a similar timescale to the computing power needed to replicate it.<br><br><br>Early estimates<br><br><br>For low-level brain simulation, a really effective cluster of computers or GPUs would be needed, offered the huge quantity of synapses within the human brain. Each of the 1011 (one hundred billion) neurons has on average 7,000 synaptic connections (synapses) to other neurons. The brain of a three-year-old child has about 1015 synapses (1 quadrillion). This number decreases with age, stabilizing by the adult years. Estimates vary for an adult, ranging from 1014 to 5 × 1014 synapses (100 to 500 trillion). [120] A quote of the brain's processing power, based on an easy switch model for nerve cell activity, is around 1014 (100 trillion) synaptic updates per second (SUPS). [121]<br><br>In 1997, Kurzweil took a look at various quotes for the hardware needed to equate to the human brain and embraced a figure of 1016 computations per second (cps). [e] (For contrast, if a "computation" was equivalent to one "floating-point operation" - a measure utilized to rate present supercomputers - then 1016 "calculations" would be comparable to 10 petaFLOPS, achieved in 2011, while 1018 was attained in 2022.) He utilized this figure to predict the required hardware would be readily available sometime in between 2015 and 2025, if the exponential growth in computer power at the time of writing continued.<br><br><br>Current research<br><br><br>The Human Brain Project, an EU-funded initiative active from 2013 to 2023, has established a particularly in-depth and openly accessible atlas of the human brain. [124] In 2023, researchers from Duke University carried out a high-resolution scan of a mouse brain.<br><br><br>Criticisms of simulation-based methods<br><br><br>The artificial neuron design presumed by Kurzweil and utilized in numerous current synthetic neural network applications is easy compared with biological neurons. A brain simulation would likely need to record the detailed cellular behaviour of biological nerve cells, currently understood only in broad overview. The overhead introduced by complete modeling of the biological, chemical, and physical information of neural behaviour (especially on a molecular scale) would need computational powers a number of orders of magnitude larger than Kurzweil's quote. In addition, the estimates do not account for glial cells, which are understood to contribute in cognitive procedures. [125]<br><br>A fundamental criticism of the simulated brain approach originates from embodied cognition theory which asserts that human embodiment is a vital aspect of human intelligence and is necessary to ground meaning. [126] [127] If this theory is correct, any fully practical brain model will require to incorporate more than simply the neurons (e.g., a robotic body). Goertzel [103] proposes virtual embodiment (like in metaverses like Second Life) as an alternative, but it is unidentified whether this would be enough.<br><br><br>Philosophical perspective<br><br><br>"Strong [http://120.77.205.30:9998 AI]" as specified in philosophy<br><br><br>In 1980, theorist John Searle created the term "strong [https://maltesepuppy.com.au AI]" as part of his Chinese space argument. [128] He proposed a distinction between two hypotheses about artificial intelligence: [f]<br><br>Strong AI hypothesis: An expert system system can have "a mind" and "awareness".<br>Weak [https://happyplanet.shop AI] hypothesis: A synthetic intelligence system can (just) act like it thinks and has a mind and awareness.<br><br><br>The very first one he called "strong" since it makes a stronger declaration: it presumes something unique has actually happened to the machine that goes beyond those capabilities that we can check. The behaviour of a "weak [http://www.zsiz.ru AI]" device would be precisely similar to a "strong [http://www.sweetchurros.com AI]" machine, however the latter would likewise have subjective conscious experience. This usage is also common in academic [https://klbwaterbouwwerken.nl AI] research study and textbooks. [129]<br><br>In contrast to Searle and mainstream [https://holo-news.com AI], some futurists such as Ray Kurzweil use the term "strong AI" to suggest "human level synthetic general intelligence". [102] This is not the like Searle's strong [http://47.105.162.154 AI], unless it is assumed that awareness is essential for human-level AGI. Academic thinkers such as Searle do not think that holds true, and to most expert system researchers the concern is out-of-scope. [130]<br><br>Mainstream AI is most interested in how a program behaves. [131] According to Russell and Norvig, "as long as the program works, they do not care if you call it genuine or a simulation." [130] If the program can behave as if it has a mind, then there is no need to know if it actually has mind - certainly, there would be no way to inform. For [http://printworksstpete.com AI] research study, Searle's "weak [https://www.walpolefiles.it AI] hypothesis" is equivalent to the statement "artificial general intelligence is possible". Thus, according to Russell and Norvig, "most [http://otg.cn.ua AI] scientists take the weak [https://slotslot2.edublogs.org AI] hypothesis for granted, and do not care about the strong [http://forum.emrpg.com AI] hypothesis." [130] Thus, for academic [https://www.camindesign.co.il AI] research, "Strong [https://www.dharmakathayen.com AI]" and "AGI" are 2 different things.<br><br><br>Consciousness<br><br><br>Consciousness can have numerous meanings, and some aspects play significant functions in sci-fi and the principles of expert system:<br><br><br>Sentience (or "extraordinary awareness"): The capability to "feel" understandings or feelings subjectively, rather than the capability to reason about understandings. Some thinkers, such as David Chalmers, use the term "consciousness" to refer specifically to phenomenal awareness, which is approximately comparable to sentience. [132] Determining why and how subjective experience arises is understood as the hard issue of consciousness. [133] Thomas Nagel explained in 1974 that it "seems like" something to be mindful. If we are not mindful, then it does not feel like anything. Nagel utilizes the example of a bat: we can smartly ask "what does it seem like to be a bat?" However, we are not likely to ask "what does it seem like to be a toaster?" Nagel concludes that a bat seems conscious (i.e., has consciousness) however a toaster does not. [134] In 2022, a Google engineer declared that the business's [https://www.bubbleball.nl AI] chatbot, LaMDA, had attained life, though this claim was widely challenged by other experts. [135]<br><br>Self-awareness: To have mindful awareness of oneself as a separate person, especially to be knowingly knowledgeable about one's own thoughts. This is opposed to simply being the "topic of one's thought"-an os or debugger has the ability to be "familiar with itself" (that is, to represent itself in the same way it represents whatever else)-but this is not what individuals typically imply when they utilize the term "self-awareness". [g]<br><br>These characteristics have an ethical measurement. [https://laserprecisionengraving.com AI] life would offer rise to issues of well-being and legal protection, likewise to animals. [136] Other elements of consciousness related to cognitive abilities are likewise pertinent to the principle of AI rights. [137] Determining how to integrate innovative [https://onthewaytohell.com AI] with existing legal and social frameworks is an emergent concern. [138]<br><br>Benefits<br><br><br>AGI could have a wide range of applications. If oriented towards such goals, AGI might help alleviate different problems in the world such as appetite, poverty and health issues. [139]<br><br>AGI could improve productivity and efficiency in many tasks. For example, in public health, AGI could accelerate medical research, especially against cancer. [140] It might look after the senior, [141] and equalize access to quick, premium medical diagnostics. It could provide enjoyable, cheap and tailored education. [141] The requirement to work to subsist might become obsolete if the wealth produced is correctly rearranged. [141] [142] This likewise raises the question of the location of people in a drastically automated society.<br> <br><br>AGI could likewise assist to make reasonable decisions, and to expect and prevent disasters. It could likewise help to profit of possibly catastrophic technologies such as nanotechnology or environment engineering, while preventing the associated dangers. [143] If an AGI's main objective is to prevent existential disasters such as human extinction (which might be hard if the Vulnerable World Hypothesis turns out to be true), [144] it might take procedures to drastically minimize the risks [143] while lessening the effect of these measures on our lifestyle.<br><br><br>Risks<br><br><br>Existential risks<br><br><br>AGI might represent several types of existential danger, which are threats that threaten "the early extinction of Earth-originating smart life or the permanent and drastic damage of its potential for preferable future advancement". [145] The risk of human extinction from AGI has actually been the subject of lots of debates, however there is also the possibility that the development of AGI would lead to a completely problematic future. Notably, it could be utilized to spread out and maintain the set of worths of whoever develops it. If mankind still has ethical blind areas comparable to slavery in the past, AGI may irreversibly entrench it, preventing ethical progress. [146] Furthermore, AGI could help with mass security and indoctrination, which might be utilized to develop a steady repressive worldwide totalitarian routine. [147] [148] There is also a danger for the machines themselves. If machines that are sentient or otherwise worthwhile of ethical consideration are mass created in the future, engaging in a civilizational path that indefinitely disregards their welfare and interests might be an existential catastrophe. [149] [150] Considering how much AGI might improve mankind's future and help in reducing other existential threats, Toby Ord calls these existential risks "an argument for proceeding with due caution", not for "deserting [http://fincmo.com AI]". [147]<br><br>Risk of loss of control and human termination<br><br><br>The thesis that AI postures an existential risk for people, which this danger needs more attention, is controversial however has been backed in 2023 by many public figures, AI scientists and CEOs of [https://git.xhkjedu.com AI] business such as Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Demis Hassabis and Sam Altman. [151] [152]<br><br>In 2014, Stephen Hawking criticized widespread indifference:<br><br><br>So, facing possible futures of incalculable advantages and dangers, the professionals are certainly doing everything possible to ensure the finest outcome, right? Wrong. If a remarkable alien civilisation sent us a message stating, 'We'll get here in a couple of years,' would we just reply, 'OK, call us when you get here-we'll leave the lights on?' Probably not-but this is more or less what is taking place with [https://topteamwork.nl AI]. [153]<br><br>The potential fate of humankind has sometimes been compared to the fate of gorillas threatened by human activities. The contrast states that greater intelligence enabled mankind to control gorillas, which are now vulnerable in manner ins which they might not have actually prepared for. As an outcome, the gorilla has become a threatened types, not out of malice, however simply as a security damage from human activities. [154]<br><br>The skeptic Yann LeCun thinks about that AGIs will have no desire to control humankind and that we should take care not to anthropomorphize them and analyze their intents as we would for humans. He stated that individuals won't be "clever enough to develop super-intelligent devices, yet ridiculously stupid to the point of offering it moronic objectives without any safeguards". [155] On the other side, the idea of crucial convergence recommends that almost whatever their objectives, smart agents will have reasons to try to endure and obtain more power as intermediary steps to achieving these objectives. Which this does not need having emotions. [156]<br><br>Many scholars who are concerned about existential threat supporter for more research into fixing the "control issue" to address the question: what kinds of safeguards, algorithms, or architectures can developers carry out to increase the probability that their recursively-improving [https://digitalethos.net AI] would continue to behave in a friendly, rather than destructive, manner after it reaches superintelligence? [157] [158] Solving the control problem is complicated by the AI arms race (which could lead to a race to the bottom of safety preventative measures in order to launch items before rivals), [159] and the use of [https://dubaiclub.shop AI] in weapon systems. [160]<br><br>The thesis that [http://dev.onstyler.net:30300 AI] can posture existential risk also has critics. Skeptics generally say that AGI is unlikely in the short-term, or that concerns about AGI distract from other issues associated with existing [http://digiworld.co.kr AI]. [161] Former Google fraud czar Shuman Ghosemajumder thinks about that for lots of people beyond the technology market, existing chatbots and LLMs are already perceived as though they were AGI, causing more misconception and fear. [162]<br><br>Skeptics in some cases charge that the thesis is crypto-religious, with an unreasonable belief in the possibility of superintelligence replacing an unreasonable belief in an omnipotent God. [163] Some scientists believe that the interaction campaigns on [http://blog.streettracklife.com AI] existential threat by particular [http://eselohren.de AI] groups (such as OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepMind, and Conjecture) might be an at effort at regulative capture and to inflate interest in their products. [164] [165]<br><br>In 2023, the CEOs of Google DeepMind, OpenAI and Anthropic, along with other industry leaders and scientists, released a joint declaration asserting that "Mitigating the threat of termination from [http://175.27.189.80:3000 AI] must be a global concern along with other societal-scale threats such as pandemics and nuclear war." [152]<br><br>Mass joblessness<br><br><br>Researchers from OpenAI approximated that "80% of the U.S. workforce could have at least 10% of their work  by the intro of LLMs, while around 19% of workers may see a minimum of 50% of their jobs impacted". [166] [167] They think about office employees to be the most exposed, for example mathematicians, accounting professionals or web designers. [167] AGI could have a much better autonomy, capability to make choices, to interface with other computer system tools, but likewise to manage robotized bodies.<br><br><br>According to Stephen Hawking, the outcome of automation on the lifestyle will depend upon how the wealth will be rearranged: [142]<br><br>Everyone can delight in a life of elegant leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or the majority of people can end up miserably bad if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second alternative, with innovation driving ever-increasing inequality<br><br><br>Elon Musk considers that the automation of society will need federal governments to adopt a universal basic income. [168]<br><br>See also<br><br><br>Artificial brain - Software and hardware with cognitive capabilities similar to those of the animal or human brain<br>AI impact<br>[https://doctorkamazu.co.za AI] safety - Research location on making [https://autobodyalliance.shop AI] safe and beneficial<br>[https://traking-systems.net AI] alignment - [https://potatube.com AI] conformance to the desired goal<br>A.I. Rising - 2018 movie directed by Lazar Bodroža<br>Expert system<br>Automated artificial intelligence - Process of automating the application of maker learning<br>BRAIN Initiative - Collaborative public-private research initiative revealed by the Obama administration<br>China Brain Project<br>Future of Humanity Institute - Defunct Oxford interdisciplinary research centre<br>General game playing - Ability of expert system to play different video games<br>Generative synthetic intelligence - [http://www.zsiz.ru AI] system efficient in creating material in response to prompts<br>Human Brain Project - Scientific research job<br>Intelligence amplification - Use of details innovation to enhance human intelligence (IA).<br>Machine principles - Moral behaviours of man-made makers.<br>Moravec's paradox.<br>Multi-task learning - Solving numerous machine learning jobs at the same time.<br>Neural scaling law - Statistical law in artificial intelligence.<br>Outline of synthetic intelligence - Overview of and topical guide to expert system.<br>Transhumanism - Philosophical motion.<br>Synthetic intelligence - Alternate term for or type of artificial intelligence.<br>Transfer learning - Machine knowing strategy.<br>Loebner Prize - Annual [https://mypungi.com AI] competition.<br>Hardware for synthetic intelligence - Hardware specifically designed and enhanced for expert system.<br>Weak expert system - Form of expert system.<br><br><br>Notes<br><br><br>^ a b See listed below for the origin of the term "strong [https://www.todaydeals.org AI]", and see the academic meaning of "strong [https://tassupaikka.fi AI]" and weak [http://www.sweetchurros.com AI] in the post Chinese space.<br>^ [https://9miao.fun:6839 AI] founder John McCarthy composes: "we can not yet identify in general what type of computational treatments we desire to call smart. " [26] (For a discussion of some meanings of intelligence utilized by expert system researchers, see approach of expert system.).<br>^ The Lighthill report particularly slammed [http://120.77.205.30:9998 AI]'s "grandiose objectives" and led the taking apart of [https://www.elcon-medical.com AI] research in England. [55] In the U.S., DARPA ended up being figured out to money only "mission-oriented direct research study, instead of basic undirected research study". [56] [57] ^ As [https://longtermcare.gohealthytravel.com AI] creator John McCarthy composes "it would be a great relief to the remainder of the workers in [http://basketball-is-life.rosaverde.org AI] if the inventors of brand-new basic formalisms would reveal their hopes in a more secured kind than has often been the case." [61] ^ In "Mind Children" [122] 1015 cps is used. More recently, in 1997, [123] Moravec argued for 108 MIPS which would roughly represent 1014 cps. Moravec talks in regards to MIPS, not "cps", which is a non-standard term Kurzweil introduced.<br>^ As specified in a standard [https://k-rin.com AI] book: "The assertion that makers might possibly act intelligently (or, perhaps better, act as if they were smart) is called the 'weak [http://vichiagro.com AI]' hypothesis by thinkers, and the assertion that devices that do so are in fact thinking (rather than simulating thinking) is called the 'strong AI' hypothesis." [121] ^ Alan Turing made this point in 1950. [36] References<br><br><br>^ Krishna, Sri (9 February 2023). "What is artificial narrow intelligence (ANI)?". VentureBeat. Retrieved 1 March 2024. ANI is developed to carry out a single job.<br>^ "OpenAI Charter". OpenAI. Retrieved 6 April 2023. Our objective is to make sure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity.<br>^ Heath, Alex (18 January 2024). "Mark Zuckerberg's new objective is creating artificial general intelligence". The Verge. Retrieved 13 June 2024. Our vision is to build [https://pasiastemarzenia.pl AI] that is better than human-level at all of the human senses.<br>^ Baum, Seth D. (2020 ). A Study of Artificial General Intelligence Projects for Ethics, Risk, and Policy (PDF) (Report). Global Catastrophic Risk Institute. Retrieved 28 November 2024. 72 AGI R&D tasks were determined as being active in 2020.<br>^ a b c "AI timelines: What do specialists in artificial intelligence anticipate for the future?". Our World in Data. Retrieved 6 April 2023.<br>^ Metz, Cade (15 May 2023). "Some Researchers Say A.I. Is Already Here, Stirring Debate in Tech Circles". The New York Times. Retrieved 18 May 2023.<br>^ "[https://www.bruederli.com AI] pioneer Geoffrey Hinton quits Google and cautions of danger ahead". The New York Times. 1 May 2023. Retrieved 2 May 2023. It is tough to see how you can avoid the bad actors from utilizing it for bad things.<br>^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric (2023 ). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4". arXiv preprint. arXiv:2303.12712. GPT-4 reveals stimulates of AGI.<br>^ Butler, Octavia E. (1993 ). Parable of the Sower. Grand Central Publishing. ISBN 978-0-4466-7550-5. All that you touch you alter. All that you alter modifications you.<br>^ Vinge, Vernor (1992 ). A Fire Upon the Deep. Tor Books. ISBN 978-0-8125-1528-2. The Singularity is coming.<br>^ Morozov, Evgeny (30 June 2023). "The True Threat of Expert System". The New York City Times. The real danger is not [https://doctorkamazu.co.za AI] itself but the way we deploy it.<br>^ "Impressed by expert system? Experts state AGI is following, and it has 'existential' threats". ABC News. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 6 April 2023. AGI could posture existential threats to humankind.<br>^ Bostrom, Nick (2014 ). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2. The very first superintelligence will be the last creation that humankind needs to make.<br>^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). "A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn". The New York City Times. Mitigating the danger of termination from [http://F.R.A.G.Ra.NC.E.Rnmn%40.R.Os.P.E.R.Les.C@Pezedium.Free.fr AI] need to be a global priority.<br>^ "Statement on [https://aktualinfo.org AI] Risk". Center for [http://www.ljrproductions.com AI] Safety. Retrieved 1 March 2024. [https://git.cnpmf.embrapa.br AI] specialists alert of risk of extinction from [http://bobashop.com.ua AI].<br>^ Mitchell, Melanie (30 May 2023). "Are [http://sintagmamedia.com AI]'s Doomsday Scenarios Worth Taking Seriously?". The New York Times. We are far from producing makers that can outthink us in basic methods.<br>^ LeCun, Yann (June 2023). "AGI does not present an existential danger". Medium. There is no factor to fear [https://www.bizcn.co.kr AI] as an existential hazard.<br>^ Kurzweil 2005, p. 260.<br>^ a b Kurzweil, Ray (5 August 2005), "Long Live [http://alvicmazatlan.com AI]", Forbes, archived from the initial on 14 August 2005: Kurzweil describes strong AI as "maker intelligence with the full range of human intelligence.".<br>^ "The Age of Artificial Intelligence: George John at TEDxLondonBusinessSchool 2013". Archived from the initial on 26 February 2014. Retrieved 22 February 2014.<br>^ Newell & Simon 1976, This is the term they utilize for "human-level" intelligence in the physical symbol system hypothesis.<br>^ "The Open University on Strong and Weak [http://www.fande.jp AI]". Archived from the original on 25 September 2009. Retrieved 8 October 2007.<br>^ "What is artificial superintelligence (ASI)?|Definition from TechTarget". Enterprise AI. Retrieved 8 October 2023.<br>^ "Artificial intelligence is transforming our world - it is on all of us to ensure that it works out". Our World in Data. Retrieved 8 October 2023.<br>^ Dickson, Ben (16 November 2023). "Here is how far we are to accomplishing AGI, according to DeepMind". VentureBeat.<br>^ McCarthy, John (2007a). "Basic Questions". Stanford University. Archived from the original on 26 October 2007. Retrieved 6 December 2007.<br>^ This list of intelligent qualities is based on the subjects covered by major [https://yozhki.ru AI] textbooks, consisting of: Russell & Norvig 2003, Luger & Stubblefield 2004, Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998 and Nilsson 1998.<br>^ Johnson 1987.<br>^ de Charms, R. (1968 ). Personal causation. New York: Academic Press.<br>^ a b Pfeifer, R. and Bongard J. C., How the body shapes the method we think: a new view of intelligence (The MIT Press, 2007). ISBN 0-2621-6239-3.<br>^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reassessed: The concept of proficiency". Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966.<br>^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reevaluated: The concept of competence". Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966.<br>^ Muehlhauser, Luke (11 August 2013). "What is AGI?". Machine Intelligence Research Institute. Archived from the initial on 25 April 2014. Retrieved 1 May 2014.<br>^ "What is Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)?|4 Tests For Ensuring Artificial General Intelligence". Talky Blog. 13 July 2019. Archived from the original on 17 July 2019. Retrieved 17 July 2019.<br>^ Kirk-Giannini, Cameron Domenico; Goldstein, Simon (16 October 2023). "[https://ahanainfotech.com AI] is closer than ever to passing the Turing test for 'intelligence'. What occurs when it does?". The Conversation. Retrieved 22 September 2024.<br>^ a b Turing 1950.<br>^ Turing, Alan (1952 ). B. Jack Copeland (ed.). Can Automatic Calculating Machines Be Said To Think?. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 487-506. ISBN 978-0-1982-5079-1.<br>^ "Eugene Goostman is a real kid - the Turing Test says so". The Guardian. 9 June 2014. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ "Scientists contest whether computer 'Eugene Goostman' passed Turing test". BBC News. 9 June 2014. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Jones, Cameron R.; Bergen, Benjamin K. (9 May 2024). "People can not identify GPT-4 from a human in a Turing test". arXiv:2405.08007 [cs.HC]<br>^ Varanasi, Lakshmi (21 March 2023). "[https://tdtfoods.com AI] designs like ChatGPT and GPT-4 are acing whatever from the bar exam to AP Biology. Here's a list of hard examinations both [http://embargorock.com AI] versions have actually passed". Business Insider. Retrieved 30 May 2023.<br>^ Naysmith, Caleb (7 February 2023). "6 Jobs Artificial Intelligence Is Already Replacing and  [http://www.asystechnik.com/index.php/Benutzer:ClevelandDigby5 asystechnik.com] How Investors Can Profit From It". Retrieved 30 May 2023.<br>^ Turk, Victoria (28 January 2015). "The Plan to Replace the Turing Test with a 'Turing Olympics'". Vice. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Gopani, Avi (25 May 2022). "Turing Test is unreliable. The Winograd Schema is obsolete. Coffee is the answer". Analytics India Magazine. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Bhaimiya, Sawdah (20 June 2023). "DeepMind's co-founder suggested evaluating an [http://connect.yaazia.com AI] chatbot's capability to turn $100,000 into $1 million to measure human-like intelligence". Business Insider. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Suleyman, Mustafa (14 July 2023). "Mustafa Suleyman: My new Turing test would see if [http://iicsl.es AI] can make $1 million". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 3 March 2024.<br>^ Shapiro, Stuart C. (1992 ). "Artificial Intelligence" (PDF). In Stuart C. Shapiro (ed.). Encyclopedia of Expert System (Second ed.). New York City: John Wiley. pp. 54-57. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 1 February 2016. (Section 4 is on "[https://luatthaiminh.vn AI]-Complete Tasks".).<br>^ Yampolskiy, Roman V. (2012 ). Xin-She Yang (ed.). "Turing Test as a Specifying Feature of [https://www.proathletediscuss.com AI]-Completeness" (PDF). Expert System, Evolutionary Computation and Metaheuristics (AIECM): 3-17. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 22 May 2013.<br>^ "[https://gitea.thisbot.ru AI] Index: State of AI in 13 Charts". Stanford University Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence. 15 April 2024. Retrieved 27 May 2024.<br>^ Crevier 1993, pp. 48-50.<br>^ Kaplan, Andreas (2022 ). "Expert System, Business and Civilization - Our Fate Made in Machines". Archived from the initial on 6 May 2022. Retrieved 12 March 2022.<br>^ Simon 1965, p. 96 priced quote in Crevier 1993, p. 109.<br>^ "Scientist on the Set: An Interview with Marvin Minsky". Archived from the original on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 5 April 2008.<br>^ Marvin Minsky to Darrach (1970 ), priced estimate in Crevier (1993, p. 109).<br>^ Lighthill 1973; Howe 1994.<br>^ a b NRC 1999, "Shift to Applied Research Increases Investment".<br>^ Crevier 1993, pp. 115-117; Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 21-22.<br>^ Crevier 1993, p. 211, Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 24 and see likewise Feigenbaum & McCorduck 1983.<br>^ Crevier 1993, pp. 161-162, 197-203, 240; Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 25.<br>^ Crevier 1993, pp. 209-212.<br>^ McCarthy, John (2000 ). "Respond to Lighthill". Stanford University. Archived from the original on 30 September 2008. Retrieved 29 September 2007.<br>^ Markoff, John (14 October 2005). "Behind Artificial Intelligence, a Squadron of Bright Real People". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2 February 2023. Retrieved 18 February 2017. At its low point, some computer system researchers and software application engineers avoided the term expert system for fear of being deemed wild-eyed dreamers.<br>^ Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 25-26<br>^ "Trends in the Emerging Tech Hype Cycle". Gartner Reports. Archived from the original on 22 May 2019. Retrieved 7 May 2019.<br>^ a b Moravec 1988, p. 20<br>^ Harnad, S. (1990 ). "The Symbol Grounding Problem". Physica D. 42 (1-3): 335-346. arXiv: cs/9906002. Bibcode:1990 PhyD ... 42..335 H. doi:10.1016/ 0167-2789( 90 )90087-6. S2CID 3204300.<br>^ Gubrud 1997<br>^ Hutter, Marcus (2005 ). Universal Expert System: Sequential Decisions Based on Algorithmic Probability. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science an EATCS Series. Springer. doi:10.1007/ b138233. ISBN 978-3-5402-6877-2. S2CID 33352850. Archived from the initial on 19 July 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2022.<br>^ Legg, Shane (2008 ). Machine Super Intelligence (PDF) (Thesis). University of Lugano. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 15 June 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2022.<br>^ Goertzel, Ben (2014 ). Artificial General Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Technology. Vol. 8598. Journal of Artificial General Intelligence. doi:10.1007/ 978-3-319-09274-4. ISBN 978-3-3190-9273-7. S2CID 8387410.<br>^ "Who created the term "AGI"?". goertzel.org. Archived from the initial on 28 December 2018. Retrieved 28 December 2018., via Life 3.0: 'The term "AGI" was popularized by ... Shane Legg, Mark Gubrud and Ben Goertzel'<br>^ Wang & Goertzel 2007<br>^ "First International Summer School in Artificial General Intelligence, Main summer school: June 22 - July 3, 2009, OpenCog Lab: July 6-9, 2009". Archived from the original on 28 September 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.<br>^ "Избираеми дисциплини 2009/2010 - пролетен триместър" [Elective courses 2009/2010 - spring trimester] Факултет по математика и информатика [Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics] (in Bulgarian). Archived from the initial on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.<br>^ "Избираеми дисциплини 2010/2011 - зимен триместър" [Elective courses 2010/2011 - winter trimester] Факултет по математика и информатика [Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics] (in Bulgarian). Archived from the initial on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.<br>^ Shevlin, Henry; Vold, Karina; Crosby, Matthew; Halina, Marta (4 October 2019). "The limitations of maker intelligence: Despite development in device intelligence, synthetic general intelligence is still a significant difficulty". EMBO Reports. 20 (10 ): e49177. doi:10.15252/ embr.201949177. ISSN 1469-221X. PMC 6776890. PMID 31531926.<br>^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric; Kamar, Ece; Lee, Peter; Lee, Yin Tat; Li, Yuanzhi; Lundberg, Scott; Nori, Harsha; Palangi, Hamid; Ribeiro, Marco Tulio; Zhang, Yi (27 March 2023). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early explores GPT-4". arXiv:2303.12712 [cs.CL]<br>^ "Microsoft Researchers Claim GPT-4 Is Showing "Sparks" of AGI". Futurism. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 13 December 2023.<br>^ Allen, Paul; Greaves, Mark (12 October 2011). "The Singularity Isn't Near". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 17 September 2014.<br>^ Winfield, Alan. "Artificial intelligence will not develop into a Frankenstein's beast". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 17 September 2014. Retrieved 17 September 2014.<br>^ Deane, George (2022 ). "Machines That Feel and Think: The Role of Affective Feelings and Mental Action in (Artificial) General Intelligence". Artificial Life. 28 (3 ): 289-309. doi:10.1162/ artl_a_00368. ISSN 1064-5462. PMID 35881678. S2CID 251069071.<br>^ a b c Clocksin 2003.<br>^ Fjelland, Ragnar (17 June 2020). "Why basic artificial intelligence will not be recognized". Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 7 (1 ): 1-9. doi:10.1057/ s41599-020-0494-4. hdl:11250/ 2726984. ISSN 2662-9992. S2CID 219710554.<br>^ McCarthy 2007b.<br>^ Khatchadourian, Raffi (23 November 2015). "The Doomsday Invention: Will expert system bring us utopia or damage?". The New Yorker. Archived from the original on 28 January 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016.<br>^ Müller, V. C., & Bostrom, N. (2016 ). Future development in expert system: A study of skilled opinion. In Fundamental issues of artificial intelligence (pp. 555-572). Springer, Cham.<br>^ Armstrong, Stuart, and Kaj Sotala. 2012. "How We're Predicting [https://doctorkamazu.co.za AI]-or Failing To." In Beyond [https://superappsocial.com AI]: Artificial Dreams, edited by Jan Romportl, Pavel Ircing, Eva Žáčková, Michal Polák and Radek Schuster, 52-75. Plzeň: University of West Bohemia<br>^ "Microsoft Now Claims GPT-4 Shows 'Sparks' of General Intelligence". 24 March 2023.<br>^ Shimek, Cary (6 July 2023). "[https://bright-v.net AI] Outperforms Humans in Creativity Test". Neuroscience News. Retrieved 20 October 2023.<br>^ Guzik, Erik E.; Byrge, Christian; Gilde, Christian (1 December 2023). "The creativity of machines: AI takes the Torrance Test". Journal of Creativity. 33 (3 ): 100065. doi:10.1016/ j.yjoc.2023.100065. ISSN 2713-3745. S2CID 261087185.<br>^ Arcas, Blaise Agüera y (10 October 2023). "Artificial General Intelligence Is Already Here". Noema.<br>^ Zia, Tehseen (8 January 2024). "Unveiling of Large Multimodal Models: Shaping the Landscape of Language Models in 2024". Unite.[https://cu-trading.com ai]. Retrieved 26 May 2024.<br>^ "Introducing OpenAI o1-preview". OpenAI. 12 September 2024.<br>^ Knight, Will. "OpenAI Announces a New AI Model, Code-Named Strawberry, That Solves Difficult Problems Step by Step". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 17 September 2024.<br>^ "OpenAI Employee Claims AGI Has Been Achieved". Orbital Today. 13 December 2024. Retrieved 27 December 2024.<br>^ "[https://www.lizallison.co AI] Index: State of [https://automobilejobs.in AI] in 13 Charts". hai.stanford.edu. 15 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024.<br>^ "Next-Gen [https://gitlab.sharksw.com AI]: OpenAI and Meta's Leap Towards Reasoning Machines". Unite.[https://brookejefferson.com ai]. 19 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024.<br>^ James, Alex P. (2022 ). "The Why, What, and How of Artificial General Intelligence Chip Development". IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems. 14 (2 ): 333-347. arXiv:2012.06338. doi:10.1109/ TCDS.2021.3069871. ISSN 2379-8920. S2CID 228376556. Archived from the initial on 28 August 2022. Retrieved 28 August 2022.<br>^ Pei, Jing; Deng, Lei; Song, Sen; Zhao, Mingguo; Zhang, Youhui; Wu, Shuang; Wang, Guanrui; Zou, Zhe; Wu, Zhenzhi; He, Wei; Chen, Feng; Deng, Ning; Wu, Si; Wang, Yu; Wu, Yujie (2019 ). "Towards synthetic basic intelligence with hybrid Tianjic chip architecture". Nature. 572 (7767 ): 106-111. Bibcode:2019 Natur.572..106 P. doi:10.1038/ s41586-019-1424-8. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 31367028. S2CID 199056116. Archived from the initial on 29 August 2022. Retrieved 29 August 2022.<br>^ Pandey, Mohit; Fernandez, Michael; Gentile, Francesco; Isayev, Olexandr; Tropsha, Alexander; Stern, Abraham C.; Cherkasov, Artem (March 2022). "The transformational role of GPU computing and deep learning in drug discovery". Nature Machine Intelligence. 4 (3 ): 211-221. doi:10.1038/ s42256-022-00463-x. ISSN 2522-5839. S2CID 252081559.<br>^ Goertzel & Pennachin 2006.<br>^ a b c (Kurzweil 2005, p. 260).<br>^ a b c Goertzel 2007.<br>^ Grace, Katja (2016 ). "Error in Armstrong and Sotala 2012". [http://2b-design.ru AI] Impacts (blog). Archived from the original on 4 December 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020.<br>^ a b Butz, Martin V. (1 March 2021). "Towards Strong AI". KI - Künstliche Intelligenz. 35 (1 ): 91-101. doi:10.1007/ s13218-021-00705-x. ISSN 1610-1987. S2CID 256065190.<br>^ Liu, Feng; Shi, Yong; Liu, Ying (2017 ). "Intelligence Quotient and Intelligence Grade of Expert System". Annals of Data Science. 4 (2 ): 179-191. arXiv:1709.10242. doi:10.1007/ s40745-017-0109-0. S2CID 37900130.<br>^ Brien, Jörn (5 October 2017). "Google-KI doppelt so schlau wie Siri" [Google AI is twice as wise as Siri - however a six-year-old beats both] (in German). Archived from the original on 3 January 2019. Retrieved 2 January 2019.<br>^ Grossman, Gary (3 September 2020). "We're getting in the [http://spacemotorhome.com.br AI] golden zone in between narrow and general [https://regieprivee.ch AI]". VentureBeat. Archived from the original on 4 September 2020. Retrieved 5 September 2020. Certainly, too, there are those who declare we are already seeing an early example of an AGI system in the recently revealed GPT-3 natural language processing (NLP) neural network. ... So is GPT-3 the very first example of an AGI system? This is arguable, but the consensus is that it is not AGI. ... If absolutely nothing else, GPT-3 tells us there is a happy medium in between narrow and general [https://www.nasalapurebuildcon.com AI].<br>^ Quach, Katyanna. "A developer developed an [https://code.lanakk.com AI] chatbot utilizing GPT-3 that helped a man speak once again to his late fiancée. OpenAI shut it down". The Register. Archived from the original on 16 October 2021. Retrieved 16 October 2021.<br>^ Wiggers, Kyle (13 May 2022), "DeepMind's brand-new [http://47.105.162.154 AI] can perform over 600 jobs, from playing games to controlling robotics", TechCrunch, archived from the original on 16 June 2022, recovered 12 June 2022.<br>^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric; Kamar, Ece; Lee, Peter; Lee, Yin Tat; Li, Yuanzhi; Lundberg, Scott; Nori, Harsha; Palangi, Hamid; Ribeiro, Marco Tulio; Zhang, Yi (22 March 2023). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early try outs GPT-4". arXiv:2303.12712 [cs.CL]<br>^ Metz, Cade (1 May 2023). "' The Godfather of A.I.' Leaves Google and Warns of Danger Ahead". The New York City Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ Bove, Tristan. "A.I. could measure up to human intelligence in 'just a couple of years,' says CEO of Google's main A.I. research lab". Fortune. Retrieved 4 September 2024.<br>^ Nellis, Stephen (2 March 2024). "Nvidia CEO says AI could pass human tests in five years". Reuters. ^ Aschenbrenner, Leopold. "SITUATIONAL AWARENESS, The Decade Ahead".<br>^ Sullivan, Mark (18 October 2023). "Why everyone appears to disagree on how to specify Artificial General Intelligence". Fast Company.<br>^ Nosta, John (5 January 2024). "The Accelerating Path to Artificial General Intelligence". Psychology Today. Retrieved 30 March 2024.<br>^ Hickey, Alex. "Whole Brain Emulation: A Giant Step for Neuroscience". Tech Brew. Retrieved 8 November 2023.<br>^ Sandberg & Boström 2008.<br>^ Drachman 2005.<br>^ a b Russell & Norvig 2003.<br>^ Moravec 1988, p. 61.<br>^ Moravec 1998.<br>^ Holmgaard Mersh, Amalie (15 September 2023). "Decade-long European research study project maps the human brain". euractiv.<br>^ Swaminathan, Nikhil (January-February 2011). "Glia-the other brain cells". Discover. Archived from the initial on 8 February 2014. Retrieved 24 January 2014.<br>^ de Vega, Glenberg & Graesser 2008. A vast array of views in current research, all of which need grounding to some degree<br>^ Thornton, Angela (26 June 2023). "How uploading our minds to a computer system might end up being possible". The Conversation. Retrieved 8 November 2023.<br>^ Searle 1980<br>^ For example: Russell & Norvig 2003,<br>Oxford University Press Dictionary of Psychology Archived 3 December 2007 at the Wayback Machine (priced quote in" Encyclopedia.com"),.<br>MIT Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science Archived 19 July 2008 at the Wayback Machine (quoted in "AITopics"),.<br>Will Biological Computers Enable Artificially Intelligent Machines to Become Persons? Archived 13 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine Anthony Tongen.<br><br><br><br><br>^ a b c Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 947.<br>^ though see Explainable expert system for interest by the field about why a program behaves the way it does.<br>^ Chalmers, David J. (9 August 2023). "Could a Large Language Model Be Conscious?". Boston Review.<br>^ Seth, Anil. "Consciousness". New Scientist. Retrieved 5 September 2024.<br>^ Nagel 1974.<br>^ "The Google engineer who believes the company's [https://jaicars.in AI] has actually come to life". The Washington Post. 11 June 2022. Retrieved 12 June 2023.<br>^ Kateman, Brian (24 July 2023). "[http://bir.localmesh.org AI] Should Be Terrified of Humans". TIME. Retrieved 5 September 2024.<br>^ Nosta, John (18 December 2023). "Should Expert System Have Rights?". Psychology Today. Retrieved 5 September 2024.<br>^ Akst, Daniel (10 April 2023). "Should Robots With Expert System Have Moral or Legal Rights?". The Wall Street Journal.<br>^ "Artificial General Intelligence - Do [es] the cost exceed benefits?". 23 August 2021. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ "How we can Benefit from Advancing Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) - Unite.[http://grandstream.ec AI]". www.unite.[https://ehrsgroup.com ai]. 7 April 2020. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ a b c Talty, Jules; Julien, Stephan. "What Will Our Society Look Like When Expert System Is Everywhere?". Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ a b Stevenson, Matt (8 October 2015). "Answers to Stephen Hawking's AMA are Here!". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ a b Bostrom, Nick (2017 ). " § Preferred order of arrival". Superintelligence: paths, dangers, techniques (Reprinted with corrections 2017 ed.). Oxford, United Kingdom; New York, New York City, USA: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2.<br>^ Piper, Kelsey (19 November 2018). "How technological progress is making it likelier than ever that people will ruin ourselves". Vox. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ Doherty, Ben (17 May 2018). "Climate alter an 'existential security threat' to Australia, Senate questions says". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 16 July 2023.<br>^ MacAskill, William (2022 ). What we owe the future. New York City, NY: Basic Books. ISBN 978-1-5416-1862-6.<br>^ a b Ord, Toby (2020 ). "Chapter 5: Future Risks, Unaligned Artificial Intelligence". The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5266-0021-9.<br>^ Al-Sibai, Noor (13 February 2022). "OpenAI Chief Scientist Says Advanced [https://empleosmarketplace.com AI] May Already Be Conscious". Futurism. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ Samuelsson, Paul Conrad (2019 ). "Artificial Consciousness: Our Greatest Ethical Challenge". Philosophy Now. Retrieved 23 December 2023.<br>^ Kateman, Brian (24 July 2023). "[http://schelliam.com AI] Should Be Terrified of Humans". TIME. Retrieved 23 December 2023.<br>^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). "A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn". The New York City Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ a b "Statement on [https://nanny4u.org AI] Risk". Center for [https://epicerie.dispatche.com AI] Safety. 30 May 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ "Stephen Hawking: 'Transcendence takes a look at the ramifications of expert system - but are we taking [http://dev.nextreal.cn AI] seriously enough?'". The Independent (UK). Archived from the original on 25 September 2015. Retrieved 3 December 2014.<br>^ Herger, Mario. "The Gorilla Problem - Enterprise Garage". Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ "The fascinating Facebook argument in between Yann LeCun, Stuart Russel and Yoshua Bengio about the threats of strong [http://ade-ong.com AI]". The interesting Facebook debate between Yann LeCun, Stuart Russel and Yoshua Bengio about the dangers of strong AI (in French). Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ "Will Expert System Doom The Mankind Within The Next 100 Years?". HuffPost. 22 August 2014. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ Sotala, Kaj; Yampolskiy, Roman V. (19 December 2014). "Responses to catastrophic AGI danger: a survey". Physica Scripta. 90 (1 ): 018001. doi:10.1088/ 0031-8949/90/ 1/018001. ISSN 0031-8949.<br>^ Bostrom, Nick (2014 ). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (First ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2.<br>^ Chow, Andrew R.; Perrigo, Billy (16 February 2023). "The [http://edytorstwoinoi.uken.krakow.pl AI] Arms Race Is On. Start Worrying". TIME. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ Tetlow, Gemma (12 January 2017). "[http://www.use-clan.de AI] arms race threats spiralling out of control, report cautions". Financial Times. Archived from the initial on 11 April 2022. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ Milmo, Dan; Stacey, Kiran (25 September 2023). "Experts disagree over threat posed however synthetic intelligence can not be disregarded". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 24 December 2023.<br>^ "Humanity, Security & AI, Oh My! (with Ian Bremmer & Shuman Ghosemajumder)". CAFE. 20 July 2023. Retrieved 15 September 2023.<br>^ Hamblin, James (9 May 2014). "But What Would completion of Humanity Mean for Me?". The Atlantic. Archived from the initial on 4 June 2014. Retrieved 12 December 2015.<br>^ Titcomb, James (30 October 2023). "Big Tech is stiring worries over [https://cbahukuk.com AI], alert scientists". The Telegraph. Retrieved 7 December 2023.<br>^ Davidson, John (30 October 2023). "Google Brain founder says huge tech is lying about AI termination risk". Australian Financial Review. Archived from the original on 7 December 2023. Retrieved 7 December 2023.<br>^ Eloundou, Tyna; Manning, Sam; Mishkin, Pamela; Rock, Daniel (17 March 2023). "GPTs are GPTs: An early take a look at the labor market effect capacity of large language designs". OpenAI. Retrieved 7 June 2023.<br>^ a b Hurst, Luke (23 March 2023). "OpenAI states 80% of employees might see their tasks affected by AI. These are the tasks most affected". euronews. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>^ Sheffey, Ayelet (20 August 2021). "Elon Musk states we require universal basic income since 'in the future, manual labor will be an option'". Business Insider. Archived from the initial on 9 July 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023.<br>Sources<br><br><br>UNESCO Science Report: the Race Against Time for Smarter Development. Paris: UNESCO. 11 June 2021. ISBN 978-9-2310-0450-6. Archived from the original on 18 June 2022. Retrieved 22 September 2021.<br>Chalmers, David (1996 ), The Conscious Mind, Oxford University Press.<br>Clocksin, William (August 2003), "Artificial intelligence and the future", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, vol. 361, no. 1809, pp. 1721-1748, Bibcode:2003 RSPTA.361.1721 C, doi:10.1098/ rsta.2003.1232, PMID 12952683, S2CID 31032007.<br>Crevier, Daniel (1993 ). [http://russian-outsider-art.com AI]: The Tumultuous Search for Expert System. New York, NY: BasicBooks. ISBN 0-465-02997-3.<br>Darrach, Brad (20 November 1970), "Meet Shakey, the First Electronic Person", Life Magazine, pp. 58-68.<br>Drachman, D. (2005 ), "Do we have brain to spare?", Neurology, 64 (12 ): 2004-2005, doi:10.1212/ 01. WNL.0000166914.38327. BB, PMID 15985565, S2CID 38482114.<br>Feigenbaum, Edward A.; McCorduck, Pamela (1983 ), The Fifth Generation: Expert System and Japan's Computer Challenge to the World, Michael Joseph, ISBN 978-0-7181-2401-4.<br>Goertzel, Ben; Pennachin, Cassio, eds. (2006 ), Artificial General Intelligence (PDF), Springer, ISBN 978-3-5402-3733-4, archived from the original (PDF) on 20 March 2013.<br>Goertzel, Ben (December 2007), "Human-level artificial basic intelligence and the possibility of a technological singularity: a reaction to Ray Kurzweil's The Singularity Is Near, and McDermott's review of Kurzweil", Artificial Intelligence, vol. 171, no. 18, Special Review Issue, pp. 1161-1173, doi:10.1016/ j.artint.2007.10.011, archived from the initial on 7 January 2016, recovered 1 April 2009.<br>Gubrud, Mark (November 1997), "Nanotechnology and International Security", Fifth Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology, archived from the initial on 29 May 2011, obtained 7 May 2011.<br>Howe, J. (November 1994), Expert System at Edinburgh University: a Perspective, archived from the original on 17 August 2007, recovered 30 August 2007.<br>Johnson, Mark (1987 ), The body in the mind, Chicago, ISBN 978-0-2264-0317-5.<br>Kurzweil, Ray (2005 ), The Singularity is Near, Viking Press.<br>Lighthill, Professor Sir James (1973 ), "Expert System: A General Survey", Artificial Intelligence: a paper seminar, Science Research Council.<br>Luger, George; Stubblefield, William (2004 ), Artificial Intelligence: Structures and Strategies for Complex Problem Solving (fifth ed.), The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., p. 720, ISBN 978-0-8053-4780-7.<br>McCarthy, John (2007b). What is Artificial Intelligence?. Stanford University. The supreme effort is to make computer system programs that can solve issues and attain objectives on the planet as well as people.<br>Moravec, Hans (1988 ), Mind Children, Harvard University Press<br>Moravec, Hans (1998 ), "When will computer hardware match the human brain?", Journal of Evolution and Technology, vol. 1, archived from the original on 15 June 2006, obtained 23 June 2006<br>Nagel (1974 ), "What Is it Like to Be a Bat" (PDF), Philosophical Review, 83 (4 ): 435-50, doi:10.2307/ 2183914, JSTOR 2183914, archived (PDF) from the initial on 16 October 2011, recovered 7 November 2009<br>Newell, Allen; Simon, H. A. (1976 ). "Computer Science as Empirical Inquiry: Symbols and Search". Communications of the ACM. 19 (3 ): 113-126. doi:10.1145/ 360018.360022.<br>Nilsson, Nils (1998 ), Expert System: A New Synthesis, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, ISBN 978-1-5586-0467-4<br>NRC (1999 ), "Developments in Artificial Intelligence", Funding a Revolution: Government Support for Computing Research, National Academy Press, archived from the initial on 12 January 2008, retrieved 29 September 2007<br>Poole, David; Mackworth, Alan; Goebel, Randy (1998 ), Computational Intelligence: A Sensible Approach, New York City: Oxford University Press, archived from the initial on 25 July 2009, retrieved 6 December 2007<br>Russell, Stuart J.; Norvig, Peter (2003 ), Expert System: A Modern Approach (second ed.), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-790395-2<br>Sandberg, Anders; Boström, Nick (2008 ), Whole Brain Emulation: A Roadmap (PDF), Technical Report # 2008-3, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University, archived (PDF) from the initial on 25 March 2020, recovered 5 April 2009<br>Searle, John (1980 ), "Minds, Brains and Programs" (PDF), Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3 (3 ): 417-457, doi:10.1017/ S0140525X00005756, S2CID 55303721, archived (PDF) from the initial on 17 March 2019, retrieved 3 September 2020<br>Simon, H. A. (1965 ), The Shape of Automation for Men and Management, New York: Harper & Row<br>Turing, Alan (October 1950). "Computing Machinery and Intelligence". Mind. 59 (236 ): 433-460. doi:10.1093/ mind/LIX.236.433. ISSN 1460-2113. JSTOR 2251299. S2CID 14636783.<br><br><br>de Vega, Manuel; Glenberg, Arthur; Graesser, Arthur, eds. (2008 ), Symbols and Embodiment: Debates on significance and cognition, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-1992-1727-4<br>Wang, Pei; Goertzel, Ben (2007 ). "Introduction: Aspects of Artificial General Intelligence". Advances in Artificial General Intelligence: Concepts, Architectures and Algorithms: Proceedings of the AGI Workshop 2006. IOS Press. pp. 1-16. ISBN 978-1-5860-3758-1. Archived from the initial on 18 February 2021. Retrieved 13 December 2020 - through ResearchGate.<br><br><br>Further reading<br><br><br>Aleksander, Igor (1996 ), Impossible Minds, World Scientific Publishing Company, ISBN 978-1-8609-4036-1<br>Azevedo FA, Carvalho LR, Grinberg LT, Farfel J, et al. (April 2009), "Equal varieties of neuronal and  [https://forum.batman.gainedge.org/index.php?action=profile;u=32314 forum.batman.gainedge.org] nonneuronal cells make the human brain an isometrically scaled-up primate brain", The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 513 (5 ): 532-541, doi:10.1002/ cne.21974, PMID 19226510, S2CID 5200449, archived from the initial on 18 February 2021, obtained 4 September 2013 - by means of ResearchGate<br>Berglas, Anthony (January 2012) [2008], Expert System Will Kill Our Grandchildren (Singularity), archived from the original on 23 July 2014, obtained 31 August 2012<br>Cukier, Kenneth, "Ready for Robots? How to Consider the Future of [https://www.excellencecommunication.fr AI]", Foreign Affairs, vol. 98, no. 4 (July/August 2019), pp. 192-98. George Dyson, historian of computing, writes (in what might be called "Dyson's Law") that "Any system simple adequate to be reasonable will not be made complex enough to act intelligently, while any system complicated enough to act smartly will be too made complex to understand." (p. 197.) Computer researcher Alex Pentland writes: "Current [https://www.aguileraspain.com AI] machine-learning algorithms are, at their core, dead basic dumb. They work, but they work by strength." (p. 198.).<br>Gelernter, David, Dream-logic, the Internet and Artificial Thought, Edge, archived from the initial on 26 July 2010, retrieved 25 July 2010.<br>Gleick, James, "The Fate of Free Choice" (review of Kevin J. Mitchell, Free Agents: How Evolution Gave Us Free Will, Princeton University Press, 2023, 333 pp.), The New York City Review of Books, vol. LXXI, no. 1 (18 January 2024), pp. 27-28, 30. "Agency is what distinguishes us from machines. For biological animals, reason and purpose come from acting worldwide and experiencing the consequences. Expert systems - disembodied,  [https://wiki.whenparked.com/User:IlseOverstreet0 wiki.whenparked.com] strangers to blood, sweat, and tears - have no occasion for that." (p. 30.).<br>Halal, William E. "TechCast Article Series: The Automation of Thought" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 6 June 2013.<br>- Halpern, Sue, "The Coming Tech Autocracy" (evaluation of Verity Harding, [https://smartcampus.seskoal.ac.id AI] Needs You: How We Can Change [http://psgacademykorea.co.kr AI]'s Future and Save Our Own, Princeton University Press, 274 pp.; Gary Marcus, Taming Silicon Valley: How We Can Ensure That [http://www.sweetchurros.com AI] Works for Us, MIT Press, 235 pp.; Daniela Rus and Gregory Mone, The Mind's Mirror: Risk and Reward in the Age of [https://ural.tatar AI], Norton, 280 pp.; Madhumita Murgia, Code Dependent: Living in the Shadow of [https://git.temporamilitum.org AI], Henry Holt, 311 pp.), The New York City Review of Books, vol. LXXI, no. 17 (7 November 2024), pp. 44-46. "' We can't reasonably anticipate that those who hope to get abundant from [https://chocolatesclavileno.com AI] are going to have the interests of the rest people close at heart,' ... composes [Gary Marcus] 'We can't depend on governments driven by project finance contributions [from tech business] to press back.' ... Marcus information the demands that residents should make of their federal governments and the tech companies. They include transparency on how AI systems work; settlement for individuals if their data [are] used to train LLMs (large language model) s and  [http://www.engel-und-waisen.de/index.php/Benutzer:WinnieSnow82746 engel-und-waisen.de] the right to consent to this usage; and the capability to hold tech companies liable for the harms they cause by eliminating Section 230, imposing cash penalites, and passing stricter item liability laws ... Marcus likewise recommends ... that a brand-new, AI-specific federal firm, akin to the FDA, the FCC, or the FTC, may provide the most robust oversight ... [T] he Fordham law professor Chinmayi Sharma ... recommends ... establish [ing] an expert licensing routine for engineers that would work in a comparable method to medical licenses, malpractice fits, and the Hippocratic oath in medicine. 'What if, like doctors,' she asks ..., '[https://ensemblescolairenotredamesaintjoseph-berck.fr AI] engineers also pledged to do no harm?'" (p. 46.).<br>Holte, R. C.; Choueiry, B. Y. (2003 ), "Abstraction and reformulation in expert system", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, vol. 358, no. 1435, pp. 1197-1204, doi:10.1098/ rstb.2003.1317, PMC 1693218, PMID 12903653.<br>Hughes-Castleberry, Kenna, "A Murder Mystery Puzzle: The literary puzzle Cain's Jawbone, which has actually stumped humans for years, reveals the constraints of natural-language-processing algorithms", Scientific American, vol. 329, no. 4 (November 2023), pp. 81-82. "This murder secret competition has actually revealed that although NLP (natural-language processing) models can unbelievable tasks, their capabilities are quite restricted by the amount of context they receive. This [...] could cause [troubles] for scientists who hope to utilize them to do things such as analyze ancient languages. In many cases, there are couple of historic records on long-gone civilizations to act as training information for such a purpose." (p. 82.).<br>Immerwahr, Daniel, "Your Lying Eyes: People now use A.I. to generate phony videos indistinguishable from genuine ones. Just how much does it matter?", The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 54-59. "If by 'deepfakes' we mean reasonable videos produced using expert system that in fact trick people, then they barely exist. The phonies aren't deep, and the deeps aren't fake. [...] A.I.-generated videos are not, in basic, operating in our media as counterfeited proof. Their role much better resembles that of animations, specifically smutty ones." (p. 59.).<br>- Leffer, Lauren, "The Risks of Trusting [http://jahc.inckorea.net AI]: We should prevent humanizing machine-learning designs utilized in clinical research", Scientific American, vol. 330, no. 6 (June 2024), pp. 80-81.<br>Lepore, Jill, "The Chit-Chatbot: Is talking with a maker a discussion?", The New Yorker, 7 October 2024, pp. 12-16.<br>Marcus, Gary, "Artificial Confidence: Even the newest, buzziest systems of artificial general intelligence are stymmied by the exact same old problems", Scientific American, vol. 327, no. 4 (October 2022), pp. 42-45.<br>McCarthy, John (October 2007), "From here to human-level [https://chocolatesclavileno.com AI]", Expert System, 171 (18 ): 1174-1182, doi:10.1016/ j.artint.2007.10.009.<br>McCorduck, Pamela (2004 ), Machines Who Think (2nd ed.), Natick, Massachusetts: A. K. Peters, ISBN 1-5688-1205-1.<br>Moravec, Hans (1976 ), The Role of Raw Power in Intelligence, archived from the original on 3 March 2016, retrieved 29 September 2007.<br>Newell, Allen; Simon, H. A. (1963 ), "GPS: A Program that Simulates Human Thought", in Feigenbaum, E. A.; Feldman, J. (eds.), Computers and Thought, New York: McGraw-Hill.<br>Omohundro, Steve (2008 ), The Nature of Self-Improving Expert system, presented and distributed at the 2007 Singularity Summit, San Francisco, California.<br>Press, Eyal, "In Front of Their Faces: Does facial-recognition technology lead police to disregard inconsistent evidence?", The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 20-26.<br>Roivainen, Eka, "AI's IQ: ChatGPT aced a [basic intelligence] test however showed that intelligence can not be determined by IQ alone", Scientific American, vol. 329, no. 1 (July/August 2023), p. 7. "Despite its high IQ, ChatGPT fails at jobs that need genuine humanlike thinking or an understanding of the physical and social world ... ChatGPT appeared unable to factor realistically and tried to count on its huge database of ... realities stemmed from online texts. "<br>- Scharre, Paul, "Killer Apps: The Real Dangers of an [http://www.riversedgeiowa.com AI] Arms Race", Foreign Affairs, vol. 98, no. 3 (May/June 2019), pp. 135-44. "Today's AI technologies are effective but unreliable. Rules-based systems can not deal with circumstances their developers did not anticipate. Learning systems are limited by the information on which they were trained. [http://www.aerowerksllc.com AI] failures have actually already resulted in catastrophe. Advanced auto-pilot features in cars and trucks, although they carry out well in some scenarios, have actually driven cars and trucks without alerting into trucks, concrete barriers, and parked cars. In the incorrect scenario, AI systems go from supersmart to superdumb in an immediate. When an opponent is attempting to manipulate and hack an [https://lightsonstikes.com AI] system, the threats are even higher." (p. 140.).<br>Sutherland, J. G. (1990 ), "Holographic Model of Memory, Learning,  [https://www.opentx.cz/index.php/U%C5%BEivatel:JurgenCardone64 opentx.cz] and Expression", International Journal of Neural Systems, vol. 1-3, pp. 256-267.<br>- Vincent, James, "Horny Robot Baby Voice: James Vincent on [http://dolcemillburn.com AI] chatbots", London Review of Books, vol. 46, no. 19 (10 October 2024), pp. 29-32." [[http://caroline-vanhoove.fr AI] chatbot] programs are enabled by brand-new technologies but count on the timelelss human tendency to anthropomorphise." (p. 29.).<br>Williams, R. W.; Herrup, K.<br>

Aktuelle Version vom 2. Februar 2025, 23:57 Uhr


Artificial basic intelligence (AGI) is a kind of expert system (AI) that matches or exceeds human cognitive abilities across a large range of cognitive jobs. This contrasts with narrow AI, which is limited to particular tasks. [1] Artificial superintelligence (ASI), on the other hand, refers to AGI that considerably surpasses human cognitive abilities. AGI is considered one of the definitions of strong AI.


Creating AGI is a main objective of AI research study and of companies such as OpenAI [2] and Meta. [3] A 2020 survey determined 72 active AGI research study and development projects across 37 countries. [4]

The timeline for attaining AGI remains a subject of continuous debate amongst researchers and experts. As of 2023, some argue that it might be possible in years or decades; others keep it may take a century or longer; a minority think it might never ever be accomplished; and another minority claims that it is currently here. [5] [6] Notable AI scientist Geoffrey Hinton has expressed concerns about the quick progress towards AGI, suggesting it might be attained sooner than lots of anticipate. [7]

There is debate on the specific definition of AGI and concerning whether modern large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 are early kinds of AGI. [8] AGI is a common topic in science fiction and futures research studies. [9] [10]

Contention exists over whether AGI represents an existential danger. [11] [12] [13] Many professionals on AI have mentioned that reducing the threat of human termination presented by AGI ought to be a global concern. [14] [15] Others find the development of AGI to be too remote to present such a threat. [16] [17]

Terminology


AGI is also understood as strong AI, [18] [19] complete AI, [20] human-level AI, [5] human-level intelligent AI, or basic smart action. [21]

Some academic sources book the term "strong AI" for computer system programs that experience life or awareness. [a] On the other hand, weak AI (or narrow AI) has the ability to fix one specific issue but does not have basic cognitive capabilities. [22] [19] Some scholastic sources use "weak AI" to refer more broadly to any programs that neither experience awareness nor have a mind in the exact same sense as people. [a]

Related principles include synthetic superintelligence and transformative AI. An artificial superintelligence (ASI) is a theoretical type of AGI that is far more usually intelligent than people, [23] while the idea of transformative AI relates to AI having a large effect on society, for example, comparable to the farming or industrial revolution. [24]

A structure for categorizing AGI in levels was proposed in 2023 by Google DeepMind scientists. They specify 5 levels of AGI: emerging, competent, expert, virtuoso, and superhuman. For instance, a qualified AGI is specified as an AI that surpasses 50% of skilled grownups in a wide variety of non-physical tasks, and bphomesteading.com a superhuman AGI (i.e. an artificial superintelligence) is similarly defined however with a limit of 100%. They consider big language designs like ChatGPT or LLaMA 2 to be instances of emerging AGI. [25]

Characteristics


Various popular definitions of intelligence have actually been proposed. Among the leading propositions is the Turing test. However, lespoetesbizarres.free.fr there are other widely known meanings, and some researchers disagree with the more popular approaches. [b]

Intelligence traits


Researchers normally hold that intelligence is needed to do all of the following: [27]

reason, use method, fix puzzles, and make judgments under unpredictability
represent understanding, including typical sense knowledge
plan
learn
- communicate in natural language
- if needed, integrate these skills in conclusion of any given objective


Many interdisciplinary methods (e.g. cognitive science, computational intelligence, and choice making) think about additional characteristics such as creativity (the capability to form unique psychological images and principles) [28] and autonomy. [29]

Computer-based systems that display a lot of these abilities exist (e.g. see computational creativity, automated thinking, decision support group, robotic, evolutionary computation, smart representative). There is debate about whether modern AI systems possess them to an appropriate degree.


Physical traits


Other capabilities are thought about preferable in smart systems, as they may impact intelligence or help in its expression. These consist of: [30]

- the ability to sense (e.g. see, hear, and so on), and
- the ability to act (e.g. relocation and control objects, change area to explore, and so on).


This consists of the capability to identify and react to danger. [31]

Although the capability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc) and the ability to act (e.g. move and manipulate things, modification location to explore, etc) can be preferable for some smart systems, [30] these physical capabilities are not strictly required for an entity to qualify as AGI-particularly under the thesis that large language models (LLMs) may currently be or become AGI. Even from a less optimistic viewpoint on LLMs, there is no firm requirement for an AGI to have a human-like type; being a silicon-based computational system is sufficient, offered it can process input (language) from the external world in location of human senses. This interpretation lines up with the understanding that AGI has actually never been proscribed a specific physical embodiment and thus does not require a capability for locomotion or traditional "eyes and ears". [32]

Tests for human-level AGI


Several tests suggested to validate human-level AGI have actually been thought about, including: [33] [34]

The concept of the test is that the machine has to try and pretend to be a man, by responding to concerns put to it, and it will just pass if the pretence is reasonably convincing. A significant portion of a jury, who must not be skilled about devices, should be taken in by the pretence. [37]

AI-complete issues


A problem is informally called "AI-complete" or "AI-hard" if it is believed that in order to fix it, one would need to carry out AGI, because the solution is beyond the abilities of a purpose-specific algorithm. [47]

There are numerous issues that have been conjectured to need basic intelligence to resolve as well as people. Examples include computer vision, natural language understanding, and handling unexpected scenarios while resolving any real-world problem. [48] Even a specific job like translation needs a machine to check out and write in both languages, follow the author's argument (reason), comprehend the context (knowledge), and faithfully replicate the author's initial intent (social intelligence). All of these problems require to be resolved at the same time in order to reach human-level maker performance.


However, much of these tasks can now be performed by contemporary big language models. According to Stanford University's 2024 AI index, AI has actually reached human-level efficiency on numerous criteria for reading understanding and visual thinking. [49]

History


Classical AI


Modern AI research study started in the mid-1950s. [50] The very first generation of AI researchers were persuaded that artificial general intelligence was possible which it would exist in just a couple of years. [51] AI leader Herbert A. Simon composed in 1965: "machines will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a man can do." [52]

Their predictions were the motivation for Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke's character HAL 9000, who embodied what AI scientists thought they might develop by the year 2001. AI pioneer Marvin Minsky was a consultant [53] on the task of making HAL 9000 as reasonable as possible according to the consensus predictions of the time. He stated in 1967, "Within a generation ... the problem of creating 'synthetic intelligence' will considerably be solved". [54]

Several classical AI projects, such as Doug Lenat's Cyc task (that began in 1984), and Allen Newell's Soar task, were directed at AGI.


However, in the early 1970s, it ended up being obvious that scientists had actually grossly ignored the trouble of the project. Funding firms became skeptical of AGI and put scientists under increasing pressure to produce useful "applied AI". [c] In the early 1980s, Japan's Fifth Generation Computer Project revived interest in AGI, setting out a ten-year timeline that consisted of AGI objectives like "carry on a table talk". [58] In reaction to this and the success of expert systems, both industry and government pumped money into the field. [56] [59] However, self-confidence in AI stunningly collapsed in the late 1980s, and the goals of the Fifth Generation Computer Project were never ever satisfied. [60] For the 2nd time in twenty years, AI researchers who anticipated the imminent accomplishment of AGI had actually been misinterpreted. By the 1990s, AI scientists had a reputation for making vain promises. They ended up being reluctant to make forecasts at all [d] and avoided mention of "human level" expert system for fear of being identified "wild-eyed dreamer [s]. [62]

Narrow AI research


In the 1990s and early 21st century, mainstream AI accomplished commercial success and academic respectability by focusing on particular sub-problems where AI can produce verifiable outcomes and commercial applications, such as speech recognition and suggestion algorithms. [63] These "applied AI" systems are now used extensively throughout the innovation market, and research study in this vein is greatly funded in both academic community and market. Since 2018 [update], advancement in this field was thought about an emerging pattern, and a fully grown stage was expected to be reached in more than ten years. [64]

At the turn of the century, lots of mainstream AI scientists [65] hoped that strong AI could be established by combining programs that resolve various sub-problems. Hans Moravec composed in 1988:


I am positive that this bottom-up route to expert system will one day satisfy the conventional top-down route more than half method, ready to offer the real-world skills and the commonsense understanding that has been so frustratingly evasive in reasoning programs. Fully smart devices will result when the metaphorical golden spike is driven uniting the two efforts. [65]

However, even at the time, this was contested. For instance, Stevan Harnad of Princeton University concluded his 1990 paper on the symbol grounding hypothesis by specifying:


The expectation has actually often been voiced that "top-down" (symbolic) approaches to modeling cognition will somehow fulfill "bottom-up" (sensory) approaches somewhere in between. If the grounding factors to consider in this paper stand, then this expectation is hopelessly modular and there is truly just one practical path from sense to signs: from the ground up. A free-floating symbolic level like the software application level of a computer will never ever be reached by this path (or vice versa) - nor is it clear why we should even attempt to reach such a level, considering that it looks as if arriving would just amount to uprooting our symbols from their intrinsic significances (therefore simply reducing ourselves to the practical equivalent of a programmable computer). [66]

Modern artificial basic intelligence research


The term "artificial basic intelligence" was utilized as early as 1997, by Mark Gubrud [67] in a conversation of the ramifications of totally automated military production and operations. A mathematical formalism of AGI was proposed by Marcus Hutter in 2000. Named AIXI, the proposed AGI agent maximises "the capability to please goals in a vast array of environments". [68] This kind of AGI, defined by the capability to increase a mathematical definition of intelligence rather than exhibit human-like behaviour, [69] was likewise called universal expert system. [70]

The term AGI was re-introduced and promoted by Shane Legg and Ben Goertzel around 2002. [71] AGI research study activity in 2006 was described by Pei Wang and Ben Goertzel [72] as "producing publications and initial results". The very first summertime school in AGI was arranged in Xiamen, China in 2009 [73] by the Xiamen university's Artificial Brain Laboratory and OpenCog. The very first university course was provided in 2010 [74] and 2011 [75] at Plovdiv University, Bulgaria by Todor Arnaudov. MIT presented a course on AGI in 2018, arranged by Lex Fridman and featuring a variety of guest lecturers.


Since 2023 [upgrade], a small number of computer researchers are active in AGI research, and lots of add to a series of AGI conferences. However, progressively more researchers are interested in open-ended learning, [76] [77] which is the idea of permitting AI to continuously learn and innovate like human beings do.


Feasibility


Since 2023, the development and potential accomplishment of AGI stays a subject of intense debate within the AI community. While traditional consensus held that AGI was a remote objective, current developments have actually led some scientists and industry figures to claim that early forms of AGI might already exist. [78] AI leader Herbert A. Simon hypothesized in 1965 that "makers will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a guy can do". This forecast stopped working to come true. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen thought that such intelligence is unlikely in the 21st century since it would need "unforeseeable and essentially unpredictable advancements" and a "clinically deep understanding of cognition". [79] Writing in The Guardian, roboticist Alan Winfield declared the gulf in between modern computing and human-level expert system is as broad as the gulf between existing area flight and useful faster-than-light spaceflight. [80]

An additional challenge is the lack of clearness in defining what intelligence entails. Does it require awareness? Must it show the ability to set objectives along with pursue them? Is it purely a matter of scale such that if model sizes increase adequately, intelligence will emerge? Are centers such as planning, reasoning, and causal understanding needed? Does intelligence require clearly duplicating the brain and its particular professors? Does it require feelings? [81]

Most AI scientists think strong AI can be achieved in the future, but some thinkers, like Hubert Dreyfus and Roger Penrose, reject the possibility of attaining strong AI. [82] [83] John McCarthy is amongst those who believe human-level AI will be achieved, however that today level of development is such that a date can not accurately be anticipated. [84] AI professionals' views on the expediency of AGI wax and wane. Four polls performed in 2012 and 2013 recommended that the average quote amongst specialists for when they would be 50% positive AGI would get here was 2040 to 2050, depending on the survey, with the mean being 2081. Of the experts, 16.5% addressed with "never ever" when asked the exact same question however with a 90% confidence rather. [85] [86] Further present AGI progress considerations can be found above Tests for confirming human-level AGI.


A report by Stuart Armstrong and Kaj Sotala of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute discovered that "over [a] 60-year time frame there is a strong predisposition towards anticipating the arrival of human-level AI as between 15 and 25 years from the time the prediction was made". They evaluated 95 forecasts made between 1950 and 2012 on when human-level AI will come about. [87]

In 2023, Microsoft researchers released a comprehensive assessment of GPT-4. They concluded: "Given the breadth and depth of GPT-4's abilities, our company believe that it could reasonably be viewed as an early (yet still incomplete) variation of an artificial basic intelligence (AGI) system." [88] Another research study in 2023 reported that GPT-4 exceeds 99% of humans on the Torrance tests of creativity. [89] [90]

Blaise Agüera y Arcas and Peter Norvig composed in 2023 that a significant level of general intelligence has actually currently been achieved with frontier designs. They composed that reluctance to this view comes from 4 main factors: a "healthy suspicion about metrics for AGI", an "ideological dedication to alternative AI theories or methods", a "commitment to human (or biological) exceptionalism", or a "concern about the financial ramifications of AGI". [91]

2023 likewise marked the introduction of large multimodal designs (large language designs efficient in processing or producing multiple modalities such as text, audio, and images). [92]

In 2024, OpenAI launched o1-preview, the first of a series of models that "spend more time thinking before they respond". According to Mira Murati, this ability to believe before responding represents a new, additional paradigm. It enhances design outputs by investing more computing power when producing the response, whereas the design scaling paradigm enhances outputs by increasing the model size, training information and training calculate power. [93] [94]

An OpenAI worker, Vahid Kazemi, claimed in 2024 that the business had actually accomplished AGI, specifying, "In my viewpoint, we have currently achieved AGI and it's a lot more clear with O1." Kazemi clarified that while the AI is not yet "much better than any human at any task", it is "better than the majority of people at most tasks." He also resolved criticisms that big language designs (LLMs) simply follow predefined patterns, comparing their learning procedure to the clinical method of observing, hypothesizing, and confirming. These statements have sparked dispute, as they depend on a broad and unconventional definition of AGI-traditionally comprehended as AI that matches human intelligence throughout all domains. Critics argue that, while OpenAI's models show remarkable adaptability, they may not fully fulfill this standard. Notably, Kazemi's comments came soon after OpenAI got rid of "AGI" from the regards to its partnership with Microsoft, prompting speculation about the business's tactical objectives. [95]

Timescales


Progress in expert system has actually traditionally gone through periods of fast development separated by periods when progress appeared to stop. [82] Ending each hiatus were fundamental advances in hardware, software application or both to develop area for further development. [82] [98] [99] For example, the hardware offered in the twentieth century was not sufficient to implement deep knowing, which requires large numbers of GPU-enabled CPUs. [100]

In the introduction to his 2006 book, [101] Goertzel states that price quotes of the time required before a really versatile AGI is constructed differ from 10 years to over a century. Since 2007 [update], the agreement in the AGI research neighborhood appeared to be that the timeline discussed by Ray Kurzweil in 2005 in The Singularity is Near [102] (i.e. in between 2015 and 2045) was possible. [103] Mainstream AI scientists have given a large range of opinions on whether development will be this rapid. A 2012 meta-analysis of 95 such viewpoints discovered a predisposition towards forecasting that the beginning of AGI would occur within 16-26 years for modern-day and historical forecasts alike. That paper has been criticized for how it categorized opinions as expert or non-expert. [104]

In 2012, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton developed a neural network called AlexNet, which won the ImageNet competition with a top-5 test mistake rate of 15.3%, considerably much better than the second-best entry's rate of 26.3% (the standard approach used a weighted sum of scores from different pre-defined classifiers). [105] AlexNet was considered the preliminary ground-breaker of the present deep knowing wave. [105]

In 2017, researchers Feng Liu, Yong Shi, and Ying Liu conducted intelligence tests on publicly readily available and freely available weak AI such as Google AI, Apple's Siri, and others. At the optimum, these AIs reached an IQ value of about 47, which corresponds around to a six-year-old child in very first grade. An adult pertains to about 100 on average. Similar tests were performed in 2014, with the IQ score reaching an optimum worth of 27. [106] [107]

In 2020, OpenAI developed GPT-3, a language model capable of performing many varied tasks without particular training. According to Gary Grossman in a VentureBeat post, while there is agreement that GPT-3 is not an example of AGI, it is thought about by some to be too advanced to be categorized as a narrow AI system. [108]

In the exact same year, Jason Rohrer utilized his GPT-3 account to develop a chatbot, and provided a chatbot-developing platform called "Project December". OpenAI asked for changes to the chatbot to comply with their safety guidelines; Rohrer detached Project December from the GPT-3 API. [109]

In 2022, DeepMind developed Gato, a "general-purpose" system capable of carrying out more than 600 various tasks. [110]

In 2023, Microsoft Research published a study on an early version of OpenAI's GPT-4, competing that it displayed more basic intelligence than previous AI models and showed human-level performance in tasks spanning several domains, such as mathematics, coding, and law. This research sparked a debate on whether GPT-4 could be considered an early, insufficient version of artificial basic intelligence, stressing the need for more expedition and assessment of such systems. [111]

In 2023, the AI researcher Geoffrey Hinton mentioned that: [112]

The concept that this stuff could really get smarter than individuals - a few individuals believed that, [...] But the majority of people believed it was method off. And I believed it was way off. I believed it was 30 to 50 years or perhaps longer away. Obviously, I no longer think that.


In May 2023, Demis Hassabis similarly said that "The progress in the last couple of years has actually been pretty extraordinary", and that he sees no factor why it would slow down, expecting AGI within a years and even a couple of years. [113] In March 2024, Nvidia's CEO, Jensen Huang, specified his expectation that within five years, AI would can passing any test a minimum of in addition to human beings. [114] In June 2024, the AI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former OpenAI staff member, estimated AGI by 2027 to be "noticeably possible". [115]

Whole brain emulation


While the advancement of transformer designs like in ChatGPT is thought about the most promising course to AGI, [116] [117] entire brain emulation can act as an alternative technique. With entire brain simulation, a brain design is constructed by scanning and mapping a biological brain in information, and then copying and imitating it on a computer system or another computational gadget. The simulation model should be adequately devoted to the original, so that it behaves in almost the very same method as the original brain. [118] Whole brain emulation is a kind of brain simulation that is talked about in computational neuroscience and neuroinformatics, and for medical research study purposes. It has been gone over in synthetic intelligence research study [103] as an approach to strong AI. Neuroimaging innovations that could deliver the essential in-depth understanding are enhancing rapidly, and futurist Ray Kurzweil in the book The Singularity Is Near [102] forecasts that a map of adequate quality will appear on a similar timescale to the computing power needed to replicate it.


Early estimates


For low-level brain simulation, a really effective cluster of computers or GPUs would be needed, offered the huge quantity of synapses within the human brain. Each of the 1011 (one hundred billion) neurons has on average 7,000 synaptic connections (synapses) to other neurons. The brain of a three-year-old child has about 1015 synapses (1 quadrillion). This number decreases with age, stabilizing by the adult years. Estimates vary for an adult, ranging from 1014 to 5 × 1014 synapses (100 to 500 trillion). [120] A quote of the brain's processing power, based on an easy switch model for nerve cell activity, is around 1014 (100 trillion) synaptic updates per second (SUPS). [121]

In 1997, Kurzweil took a look at various quotes for the hardware needed to equate to the human brain and embraced a figure of 1016 computations per second (cps). [e] (For contrast, if a "computation" was equivalent to one "floating-point operation" - a measure utilized to rate present supercomputers - then 1016 "calculations" would be comparable to 10 petaFLOPS, achieved in 2011, while 1018 was attained in 2022.) He utilized this figure to predict the required hardware would be readily available sometime in between 2015 and 2025, if the exponential growth in computer power at the time of writing continued.


Current research


The Human Brain Project, an EU-funded initiative active from 2013 to 2023, has established a particularly in-depth and openly accessible atlas of the human brain. [124] In 2023, researchers from Duke University carried out a high-resolution scan of a mouse brain.


Criticisms of simulation-based methods


The artificial neuron design presumed by Kurzweil and utilized in numerous current synthetic neural network applications is easy compared with biological neurons. A brain simulation would likely need to record the detailed cellular behaviour of biological nerve cells, currently understood only in broad overview. The overhead introduced by complete modeling of the biological, chemical, and physical information of neural behaviour (especially on a molecular scale) would need computational powers a number of orders of magnitude larger than Kurzweil's quote. In addition, the estimates do not account for glial cells, which are understood to contribute in cognitive procedures. [125]

A fundamental criticism of the simulated brain approach originates from embodied cognition theory which asserts that human embodiment is a vital aspect of human intelligence and is necessary to ground meaning. [126] [127] If this theory is correct, any fully practical brain model will require to incorporate more than simply the neurons (e.g., a robotic body). Goertzel [103] proposes virtual embodiment (like in metaverses like Second Life) as an alternative, but it is unidentified whether this would be enough.


Philosophical perspective


"Strong AI" as specified in philosophy


In 1980, theorist John Searle created the term "strong AI" as part of his Chinese space argument. [128] He proposed a distinction between two hypotheses about artificial intelligence: [f]

Strong AI hypothesis: An expert system system can have "a mind" and "awareness".
Weak AI hypothesis: A synthetic intelligence system can (just) act like it thinks and has a mind and awareness.


The very first one he called "strong" since it makes a stronger declaration: it presumes something unique has actually happened to the machine that goes beyond those capabilities that we can check. The behaviour of a "weak AI" device would be precisely similar to a "strong AI" machine, however the latter would likewise have subjective conscious experience. This usage is also common in academic AI research study and textbooks. [129]

In contrast to Searle and mainstream AI, some futurists such as Ray Kurzweil use the term "strong AI" to suggest "human level synthetic general intelligence". [102] This is not the like Searle's strong AI, unless it is assumed that awareness is essential for human-level AGI. Academic thinkers such as Searle do not think that holds true, and to most expert system researchers the concern is out-of-scope. [130]

Mainstream AI is most interested in how a program behaves. [131] According to Russell and Norvig, "as long as the program works, they do not care if you call it genuine or a simulation." [130] If the program can behave as if it has a mind, then there is no need to know if it actually has mind - certainly, there would be no way to inform. For AI research study, Searle's "weak AI hypothesis" is equivalent to the statement "artificial general intelligence is possible". Thus, according to Russell and Norvig, "most AI scientists take the weak AI hypothesis for granted, and do not care about the strong AI hypothesis." [130] Thus, for academic AI research, "Strong AI" and "AGI" are 2 different things.


Consciousness


Consciousness can have numerous meanings, and some aspects play significant functions in sci-fi and the principles of expert system:


Sentience (or "extraordinary awareness"): The capability to "feel" understandings or feelings subjectively, rather than the capability to reason about understandings. Some thinkers, such as David Chalmers, use the term "consciousness" to refer specifically to phenomenal awareness, which is approximately comparable to sentience. [132] Determining why and how subjective experience arises is understood as the hard issue of consciousness. [133] Thomas Nagel explained in 1974 that it "seems like" something to be mindful. If we are not mindful, then it does not feel like anything. Nagel utilizes the example of a bat: we can smartly ask "what does it seem like to be a bat?" However, we are not likely to ask "what does it seem like to be a toaster?" Nagel concludes that a bat seems conscious (i.e., has consciousness) however a toaster does not. [134] In 2022, a Google engineer declared that the business's AI chatbot, LaMDA, had attained life, though this claim was widely challenged by other experts. [135]

Self-awareness: To have mindful awareness of oneself as a separate person, especially to be knowingly knowledgeable about one's own thoughts. This is opposed to simply being the "topic of one's thought"-an os or debugger has the ability to be "familiar with itself" (that is, to represent itself in the same way it represents whatever else)-but this is not what individuals typically imply when they utilize the term "self-awareness". [g]

These characteristics have an ethical measurement. AI life would offer rise to issues of well-being and legal protection, likewise to animals. [136] Other elements of consciousness related to cognitive abilities are likewise pertinent to the principle of AI rights. [137] Determining how to integrate innovative AI with existing legal and social frameworks is an emergent concern. [138]

Benefits


AGI could have a wide range of applications. If oriented towards such goals, AGI might help alleviate different problems in the world such as appetite, poverty and health issues. [139]

AGI could improve productivity and efficiency in many tasks. For example, in public health, AGI could accelerate medical research, especially against cancer. [140] It might look after the senior, [141] and equalize access to quick, premium medical diagnostics. It could provide enjoyable, cheap and tailored education. [141] The requirement to work to subsist might become obsolete if the wealth produced is correctly rearranged. [141] [142] This likewise raises the question of the location of people in a drastically automated society.


AGI could likewise assist to make reasonable decisions, and to expect and prevent disasters. It could likewise help to profit of possibly catastrophic technologies such as nanotechnology or environment engineering, while preventing the associated dangers. [143] If an AGI's main objective is to prevent existential disasters such as human extinction (which might be hard if the Vulnerable World Hypothesis turns out to be true), [144] it might take procedures to drastically minimize the risks [143] while lessening the effect of these measures on our lifestyle.


Risks


Existential risks


AGI might represent several types of existential danger, which are threats that threaten "the early extinction of Earth-originating smart life or the permanent and drastic damage of its potential for preferable future advancement". [145] The risk of human extinction from AGI has actually been the subject of lots of debates, however there is also the possibility that the development of AGI would lead to a completely problematic future. Notably, it could be utilized to spread out and maintain the set of worths of whoever develops it. If mankind still has ethical blind areas comparable to slavery in the past, AGI may irreversibly entrench it, preventing ethical progress. [146] Furthermore, AGI could help with mass security and indoctrination, which might be utilized to develop a steady repressive worldwide totalitarian routine. [147] [148] There is also a danger for the machines themselves. If machines that are sentient or otherwise worthwhile of ethical consideration are mass created in the future, engaging in a civilizational path that indefinitely disregards their welfare and interests might be an existential catastrophe. [149] [150] Considering how much AGI might improve mankind's future and help in reducing other existential threats, Toby Ord calls these existential risks "an argument for proceeding with due caution", not for "deserting AI". [147]

Risk of loss of control and human termination


The thesis that AI postures an existential risk for people, which this danger needs more attention, is controversial however has been backed in 2023 by many public figures, AI scientists and CEOs of AI business such as Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Demis Hassabis and Sam Altman. [151] [152]

In 2014, Stephen Hawking criticized widespread indifference:


So, facing possible futures of incalculable advantages and dangers, the professionals are certainly doing everything possible to ensure the finest outcome, right? Wrong. If a remarkable alien civilisation sent us a message stating, 'We'll get here in a couple of years,' would we just reply, 'OK, call us when you get here-we'll leave the lights on?' Probably not-but this is more or less what is taking place with AI. [153]

The potential fate of humankind has sometimes been compared to the fate of gorillas threatened by human activities. The contrast states that greater intelligence enabled mankind to control gorillas, which are now vulnerable in manner ins which they might not have actually prepared for. As an outcome, the gorilla has become a threatened types, not out of malice, however simply as a security damage from human activities. [154]

The skeptic Yann LeCun thinks about that AGIs will have no desire to control humankind and that we should take care not to anthropomorphize them and analyze their intents as we would for humans. He stated that individuals won't be "clever enough to develop super-intelligent devices, yet ridiculously stupid to the point of offering it moronic objectives without any safeguards". [155] On the other side, the idea of crucial convergence recommends that almost whatever their objectives, smart agents will have reasons to try to endure and obtain more power as intermediary steps to achieving these objectives. Which this does not need having emotions. [156]

Many scholars who are concerned about existential threat supporter for more research into fixing the "control issue" to address the question: what kinds of safeguards, algorithms, or architectures can developers carry out to increase the probability that their recursively-improving AI would continue to behave in a friendly, rather than destructive, manner after it reaches superintelligence? [157] [158] Solving the control problem is complicated by the AI arms race (which could lead to a race to the bottom of safety preventative measures in order to launch items before rivals), [159] and the use of AI in weapon systems. [160]

The thesis that AI can posture existential risk also has critics. Skeptics generally say that AGI is unlikely in the short-term, or that concerns about AGI distract from other issues associated with existing AI. [161] Former Google fraud czar Shuman Ghosemajumder thinks about that for lots of people beyond the technology market, existing chatbots and LLMs are already perceived as though they were AGI, causing more misconception and fear. [162]

Skeptics in some cases charge that the thesis is crypto-religious, with an unreasonable belief in the possibility of superintelligence replacing an unreasonable belief in an omnipotent God. [163] Some scientists believe that the interaction campaigns on AI existential threat by particular AI groups (such as OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepMind, and Conjecture) might be an at effort at regulative capture and to inflate interest in their products. [164] [165]

In 2023, the CEOs of Google DeepMind, OpenAI and Anthropic, along with other industry leaders and scientists, released a joint declaration asserting that "Mitigating the threat of termination from AI must be a global concern along with other societal-scale threats such as pandemics and nuclear war." [152]

Mass joblessness


Researchers from OpenAI approximated that "80% of the U.S. workforce could have at least 10% of their work by the intro of LLMs, while around 19% of workers may see a minimum of 50% of their jobs impacted". [166] [167] They think about office employees to be the most exposed, for example mathematicians, accounting professionals or web designers. [167] AGI could have a much better autonomy, capability to make choices, to interface with other computer system tools, but likewise to manage robotized bodies.


According to Stephen Hawking, the outcome of automation on the lifestyle will depend upon how the wealth will be rearranged: [142]

Everyone can delight in a life of elegant leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or the majority of people can end up miserably bad if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second alternative, with innovation driving ever-increasing inequality


Elon Musk considers that the automation of society will need federal governments to adopt a universal basic income. [168]

See also


Artificial brain - Software and hardware with cognitive capabilities similar to those of the animal or human brain
AI impact
AI safety - Research location on making AI safe and beneficial
AI alignment - AI conformance to the desired goal
A.I. Rising - 2018 movie directed by Lazar Bodroža
Expert system
Automated artificial intelligence - Process of automating the application of maker learning
BRAIN Initiative - Collaborative public-private research initiative revealed by the Obama administration
China Brain Project
Future of Humanity Institute - Defunct Oxford interdisciplinary research centre
General game playing - Ability of expert system to play different video games
Generative synthetic intelligence - AI system efficient in creating material in response to prompts
Human Brain Project - Scientific research job
Intelligence amplification - Use of details innovation to enhance human intelligence (IA).
Machine principles - Moral behaviours of man-made makers.
Moravec's paradox.
Multi-task learning - Solving numerous machine learning jobs at the same time.
Neural scaling law - Statistical law in artificial intelligence.
Outline of synthetic intelligence - Overview of and topical guide to expert system.
Transhumanism - Philosophical motion.
Synthetic intelligence - Alternate term for or type of artificial intelligence.
Transfer learning - Machine knowing strategy.
Loebner Prize - Annual AI competition.
Hardware for synthetic intelligence - Hardware specifically designed and enhanced for expert system.
Weak expert system - Form of expert system.


Notes


^ a b See listed below for the origin of the term "strong AI", and see the academic meaning of "strong AI" and weak AI in the post Chinese space.
^ AI founder John McCarthy composes: "we can not yet identify in general what type of computational treatments we desire to call smart. " [26] (For a discussion of some meanings of intelligence utilized by expert system researchers, see approach of expert system.).
^ The Lighthill report particularly slammed AI's "grandiose objectives" and led the taking apart of AI research in England. [55] In the U.S., DARPA ended up being figured out to money only "mission-oriented direct research study, instead of basic undirected research study". [56] [57] ^ As AI creator John McCarthy composes "it would be a great relief to the remainder of the workers in AI if the inventors of brand-new basic formalisms would reveal their hopes in a more secured kind than has often been the case." [61] ^ In "Mind Children" [122] 1015 cps is used. More recently, in 1997, [123] Moravec argued for 108 MIPS which would roughly represent 1014 cps. Moravec talks in regards to MIPS, not "cps", which is a non-standard term Kurzweil introduced.
^ As specified in a standard AI book: "The assertion that makers might possibly act intelligently (or, perhaps better, act as if they were smart) is called the 'weak AI' hypothesis by thinkers, and the assertion that devices that do so are in fact thinking (rather than simulating thinking) is called the 'strong AI' hypothesis." [121] ^ Alan Turing made this point in 1950. [36] References


^ Krishna, Sri (9 February 2023). "What is artificial narrow intelligence (ANI)?". VentureBeat. Retrieved 1 March 2024. ANI is developed to carry out a single job.
^ "OpenAI Charter". OpenAI. Retrieved 6 April 2023. Our objective is to make sure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity.
^ Heath, Alex (18 January 2024). "Mark Zuckerberg's new objective is creating artificial general intelligence". The Verge. Retrieved 13 June 2024. Our vision is to build AI that is better than human-level at all of the human senses.
^ Baum, Seth D. (2020 ). A Study of Artificial General Intelligence Projects for Ethics, Risk, and Policy (PDF) (Report). Global Catastrophic Risk Institute. Retrieved 28 November 2024. 72 AGI R&D tasks were determined as being active in 2020.
^ a b c "AI timelines: What do specialists in artificial intelligence anticipate for the future?". Our World in Data. Retrieved 6 April 2023.
^ Metz, Cade (15 May 2023). "Some Researchers Say A.I. Is Already Here, Stirring Debate in Tech Circles". The New York Times. Retrieved 18 May 2023.
^ "AI pioneer Geoffrey Hinton quits Google and cautions of danger ahead". The New York Times. 1 May 2023. Retrieved 2 May 2023. It is tough to see how you can avoid the bad actors from utilizing it for bad things.
^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric (2023 ). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4". arXiv preprint. arXiv:2303.12712. GPT-4 reveals stimulates of AGI.
^ Butler, Octavia E. (1993 ). Parable of the Sower. Grand Central Publishing. ISBN 978-0-4466-7550-5. All that you touch you alter. All that you alter modifications you.
^ Vinge, Vernor (1992 ). A Fire Upon the Deep. Tor Books. ISBN 978-0-8125-1528-2. The Singularity is coming.
^ Morozov, Evgeny (30 June 2023). "The True Threat of Expert System". The New York City Times. The real danger is not AI itself but the way we deploy it.
^ "Impressed by expert system? Experts state AGI is following, and it has 'existential' threats". ABC News. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 6 April 2023. AGI could posture existential threats to humankind.
^ Bostrom, Nick (2014 ). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2. The very first superintelligence will be the last creation that humankind needs to make.
^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). "A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn". The New York City Times. Mitigating the danger of termination from AI need to be a global priority.
^ "Statement on AI Risk". Center for AI Safety. Retrieved 1 March 2024. AI specialists alert of risk of extinction from AI.
^ Mitchell, Melanie (30 May 2023). "Are AI's Doomsday Scenarios Worth Taking Seriously?". The New York Times. We are far from producing makers that can outthink us in basic methods.
^ LeCun, Yann (June 2023). "AGI does not present an existential danger". Medium. There is no factor to fear AI as an existential hazard.
^ Kurzweil 2005, p. 260.
^ a b Kurzweil, Ray (5 August 2005), "Long Live AI", Forbes, archived from the initial on 14 August 2005: Kurzweil describes strong AI as "maker intelligence with the full range of human intelligence.".
^ "The Age of Artificial Intelligence: George John at TEDxLondonBusinessSchool 2013". Archived from the initial on 26 February 2014. Retrieved 22 February 2014.
^ Newell & Simon 1976, This is the term they utilize for "human-level" intelligence in the physical symbol system hypothesis.
^ "The Open University on Strong and Weak AI". Archived from the original on 25 September 2009. Retrieved 8 October 2007.
^ "What is artificial superintelligence (ASI)?|Definition from TechTarget". Enterprise AI. Retrieved 8 October 2023.
^ "Artificial intelligence is transforming our world - it is on all of us to ensure that it works out". Our World in Data. Retrieved 8 October 2023.
^ Dickson, Ben (16 November 2023). "Here is how far we are to accomplishing AGI, according to DeepMind". VentureBeat.
^ McCarthy, John (2007a). "Basic Questions". Stanford University. Archived from the original on 26 October 2007. Retrieved 6 December 2007.
^ This list of intelligent qualities is based on the subjects covered by major AI textbooks, consisting of: Russell & Norvig 2003, Luger & Stubblefield 2004, Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998 and Nilsson 1998.
^ Johnson 1987.
^ de Charms, R. (1968 ). Personal causation. New York: Academic Press.
^ a b Pfeifer, R. and Bongard J. C., How the body shapes the method we think: a new view of intelligence (The MIT Press, 2007). ISBN 0-2621-6239-3.
^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reassessed: The concept of proficiency". Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966.
^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reevaluated: The concept of competence". Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966.
^ Muehlhauser, Luke (11 August 2013). "What is AGI?". Machine Intelligence Research Institute. Archived from the initial on 25 April 2014. Retrieved 1 May 2014.
^ "What is Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)?|4 Tests For Ensuring Artificial General Intelligence". Talky Blog. 13 July 2019. Archived from the original on 17 July 2019. Retrieved 17 July 2019.
^ Kirk-Giannini, Cameron Domenico; Goldstein, Simon (16 October 2023). "AI is closer than ever to passing the Turing test for 'intelligence'. What occurs when it does?". The Conversation. Retrieved 22 September 2024.
^ a b Turing 1950.
^ Turing, Alan (1952 ). B. Jack Copeland (ed.). Can Automatic Calculating Machines Be Said To Think?. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 487-506. ISBN 978-0-1982-5079-1.
^ "Eugene Goostman is a real kid - the Turing Test says so". The Guardian. 9 June 2014. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 3 March 2024.
^ "Scientists contest whether computer 'Eugene Goostman' passed Turing test". BBC News. 9 June 2014. Retrieved 3 March 2024.
^ Jones, Cameron R.; Bergen, Benjamin K. (9 May 2024). "People can not identify GPT-4 from a human in a Turing test". arXiv:2405.08007 [cs.HC]
^ Varanasi, Lakshmi (21 March 2023). "AI designs like ChatGPT and GPT-4 are acing whatever from the bar exam to AP Biology. Here's a list of hard examinations both AI versions have actually passed". Business Insider. Retrieved 30 May 2023.
^ Naysmith, Caleb (7 February 2023). "6 Jobs Artificial Intelligence Is Already Replacing and asystechnik.com How Investors Can Profit From It". Retrieved 30 May 2023.
^ Turk, Victoria (28 January 2015). "The Plan to Replace the Turing Test with a 'Turing Olympics'". Vice. Retrieved 3 March 2024.
^ Gopani, Avi (25 May 2022). "Turing Test is unreliable. The Winograd Schema is obsolete. Coffee is the answer". Analytics India Magazine. Retrieved 3 March 2024.
^ Bhaimiya, Sawdah (20 June 2023). "DeepMind's co-founder suggested evaluating an AI chatbot's capability to turn $100,000 into $1 million to measure human-like intelligence". Business Insider. Retrieved 3 March 2024.
^ Suleyman, Mustafa (14 July 2023). "Mustafa Suleyman: My new Turing test would see if AI can make $1 million". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 3 March 2024.
^ Shapiro, Stuart C. (1992 ). "Artificial Intelligence" (PDF). In Stuart C. Shapiro (ed.). Encyclopedia of Expert System (Second ed.). New York City: John Wiley. pp. 54-57. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 1 February 2016. (Section 4 is on "AI-Complete Tasks".).
^ Yampolskiy, Roman V. (2012 ). Xin-She Yang (ed.). "Turing Test as a Specifying Feature of AI-Completeness" (PDF). Expert System, Evolutionary Computation and Metaheuristics (AIECM): 3-17. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 22 May 2013.
^ "AI Index: State of AI in 13 Charts". Stanford University Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence. 15 April 2024. Retrieved 27 May 2024.
^ Crevier 1993, pp. 48-50.
^ Kaplan, Andreas (2022 ). "Expert System, Business and Civilization - Our Fate Made in Machines". Archived from the initial on 6 May 2022. Retrieved 12 March 2022.
^ Simon 1965, p. 96 priced quote in Crevier 1993, p. 109.
^ "Scientist on the Set: An Interview with Marvin Minsky". Archived from the original on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 5 April 2008.
^ Marvin Minsky to Darrach (1970 ), priced estimate in Crevier (1993, p. 109).
^ Lighthill 1973; Howe 1994.
^ a b NRC 1999, "Shift to Applied Research Increases Investment".
^ Crevier 1993, pp. 115-117; Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 21-22.
^ Crevier 1993, p. 211, Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 24 and see likewise Feigenbaum & McCorduck 1983.
^ Crevier 1993, pp. 161-162, 197-203, 240; Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 25.
^ Crevier 1993, pp. 209-212.
^ McCarthy, John (2000 ). "Respond to Lighthill". Stanford University. Archived from the original on 30 September 2008. Retrieved 29 September 2007.
^ Markoff, John (14 October 2005). "Behind Artificial Intelligence, a Squadron of Bright Real People". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2 February 2023. Retrieved 18 February 2017. At its low point, some computer system researchers and software application engineers avoided the term expert system for fear of being deemed wild-eyed dreamers.
^ Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 25-26
^ "Trends in the Emerging Tech Hype Cycle". Gartner Reports. Archived from the original on 22 May 2019. Retrieved 7 May 2019.
^ a b Moravec 1988, p. 20
^ Harnad, S. (1990 ). "The Symbol Grounding Problem". Physica D. 42 (1-3): 335-346. arXiv: cs/9906002. Bibcode:1990 PhyD ... 42..335 H. doi:10.1016/ 0167-2789( 90 )90087-6. S2CID 3204300.
^ Gubrud 1997
^ Hutter, Marcus (2005 ). Universal Expert System: Sequential Decisions Based on Algorithmic Probability. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science an EATCS Series. Springer. doi:10.1007/ b138233. ISBN 978-3-5402-6877-2. S2CID 33352850. Archived from the initial on 19 July 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2022.
^ Legg, Shane (2008 ). Machine Super Intelligence (PDF) (Thesis). University of Lugano. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 15 June 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2022.
^ Goertzel, Ben (2014 ). Artificial General Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Technology. Vol. 8598. Journal of Artificial General Intelligence. doi:10.1007/ 978-3-319-09274-4. ISBN 978-3-3190-9273-7. S2CID 8387410.
^ "Who created the term "AGI"?". goertzel.org. Archived from the initial on 28 December 2018. Retrieved 28 December 2018., via Life 3.0: 'The term "AGI" was popularized by ... Shane Legg, Mark Gubrud and Ben Goertzel'
^ Wang & Goertzel 2007
^ "First International Summer School in Artificial General Intelligence, Main summer school: June 22 - July 3, 2009, OpenCog Lab: July 6-9, 2009". Archived from the original on 28 September 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
^ "Избираеми дисциплини 2009/2010 - пролетен триместър" [Elective courses 2009/2010 - spring trimester] Факултет по математика и информатика [Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics] (in Bulgarian). Archived from the initial on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
^ "Избираеми дисциплини 2010/2011 - зимен триместър" [Elective courses 2010/2011 - winter trimester] Факултет по математика и информатика [Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics] (in Bulgarian). Archived from the initial on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
^ Shevlin, Henry; Vold, Karina; Crosby, Matthew; Halina, Marta (4 October 2019). "The limitations of maker intelligence: Despite development in device intelligence, synthetic general intelligence is still a significant difficulty". EMBO Reports. 20 (10 ): e49177. doi:10.15252/ embr.201949177. ISSN 1469-221X. PMC 6776890. PMID 31531926.
^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric; Kamar, Ece; Lee, Peter; Lee, Yin Tat; Li, Yuanzhi; Lundberg, Scott; Nori, Harsha; Palangi, Hamid; Ribeiro, Marco Tulio; Zhang, Yi (27 March 2023). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early explores GPT-4". arXiv:2303.12712 [cs.CL]
^ "Microsoft Researchers Claim GPT-4 Is Showing "Sparks" of AGI". Futurism. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 13 December 2023.
^ Allen, Paul; Greaves, Mark (12 October 2011). "The Singularity Isn't Near". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 17 September 2014.
^ Winfield, Alan. "Artificial intelligence will not develop into a Frankenstein's beast". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 17 September 2014. Retrieved 17 September 2014.
^ Deane, George (2022 ). "Machines That Feel and Think: The Role of Affective Feelings and Mental Action in (Artificial) General Intelligence". Artificial Life. 28 (3 ): 289-309. doi:10.1162/ artl_a_00368. ISSN 1064-5462. PMID 35881678. S2CID 251069071.
^ a b c Clocksin 2003.
^ Fjelland, Ragnar (17 June 2020). "Why basic artificial intelligence will not be recognized". Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 7 (1 ): 1-9. doi:10.1057/ s41599-020-0494-4. hdl:11250/ 2726984. ISSN 2662-9992. S2CID 219710554.
^ McCarthy 2007b.
^ Khatchadourian, Raffi (23 November 2015). "The Doomsday Invention: Will expert system bring us utopia or damage?". The New Yorker. Archived from the original on 28 January 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016.
^ Müller, V. C., & Bostrom, N. (2016 ). Future development in expert system: A study of skilled opinion. In Fundamental issues of artificial intelligence (pp. 555-572). Springer, Cham.
^ Armstrong, Stuart, and Kaj Sotala. 2012. "How We're Predicting AI-or Failing To." In Beyond AI: Artificial Dreams, edited by Jan Romportl, Pavel Ircing, Eva Žáčková, Michal Polák and Radek Schuster, 52-75. Plzeň: University of West Bohemia
^ "Microsoft Now Claims GPT-4 Shows 'Sparks' of General Intelligence". 24 March 2023.
^ Shimek, Cary (6 July 2023). "AI Outperforms Humans in Creativity Test". Neuroscience News. Retrieved 20 October 2023.
^ Guzik, Erik E.; Byrge, Christian; Gilde, Christian (1 December 2023). "The creativity of machines: AI takes the Torrance Test". Journal of Creativity. 33 (3 ): 100065. doi:10.1016/ j.yjoc.2023.100065. ISSN 2713-3745. S2CID 261087185.
^ Arcas, Blaise Agüera y (10 October 2023). "Artificial General Intelligence Is Already Here". Noema.
^ Zia, Tehseen (8 January 2024). "Unveiling of Large Multimodal Models: Shaping the Landscape of Language Models in 2024". Unite.ai. Retrieved 26 May 2024.
^ "Introducing OpenAI o1-preview". OpenAI. 12 September 2024.
^ Knight, Will. "OpenAI Announces a New AI Model, Code-Named Strawberry, That Solves Difficult Problems Step by Step". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 17 September 2024.
^ "OpenAI Employee Claims AGI Has Been Achieved". Orbital Today. 13 December 2024. Retrieved 27 December 2024.
^ "AI Index: State of AI in 13 Charts". hai.stanford.edu. 15 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024.
^ "Next-Gen AI: OpenAI and Meta's Leap Towards Reasoning Machines". Unite.ai. 19 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024.
^ James, Alex P. (2022 ). "The Why, What, and How of Artificial General Intelligence Chip Development". IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems. 14 (2 ): 333-347. arXiv:2012.06338. doi:10.1109/ TCDS.2021.3069871. ISSN 2379-8920. S2CID 228376556. Archived from the initial on 28 August 2022. Retrieved 28 August 2022.
^ Pei, Jing; Deng, Lei; Song, Sen; Zhao, Mingguo; Zhang, Youhui; Wu, Shuang; Wang, Guanrui; Zou, Zhe; Wu, Zhenzhi; He, Wei; Chen, Feng; Deng, Ning; Wu, Si; Wang, Yu; Wu, Yujie (2019 ). "Towards synthetic basic intelligence with hybrid Tianjic chip architecture". Nature. 572 (7767 ): 106-111. Bibcode:2019 Natur.572..106 P. doi:10.1038/ s41586-019-1424-8. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 31367028. S2CID 199056116. Archived from the initial on 29 August 2022. Retrieved 29 August 2022.
^ Pandey, Mohit; Fernandez, Michael; Gentile, Francesco; Isayev, Olexandr; Tropsha, Alexander; Stern, Abraham C.; Cherkasov, Artem (March 2022). "The transformational role of GPU computing and deep learning in drug discovery". Nature Machine Intelligence. 4 (3 ): 211-221. doi:10.1038/ s42256-022-00463-x. ISSN 2522-5839. S2CID 252081559.
^ Goertzel & Pennachin 2006.
^ a b c (Kurzweil 2005, p. 260).
^ a b c Goertzel 2007.
^ Grace, Katja (2016 ). "Error in Armstrong and Sotala 2012". AI Impacts (blog). Archived from the original on 4 December 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020.
^ a b Butz, Martin V. (1 March 2021). "Towards Strong AI". KI - Künstliche Intelligenz. 35 (1 ): 91-101. doi:10.1007/ s13218-021-00705-x. ISSN 1610-1987. S2CID 256065190.
^ Liu, Feng; Shi, Yong; Liu, Ying (2017 ). "Intelligence Quotient and Intelligence Grade of Expert System". Annals of Data Science. 4 (2 ): 179-191. arXiv:1709.10242. doi:10.1007/ s40745-017-0109-0. S2CID 37900130.
^ Brien, Jörn (5 October 2017). "Google-KI doppelt so schlau wie Siri" [Google AI is twice as wise as Siri - however a six-year-old beats both] (in German). Archived from the original on 3 January 2019. Retrieved 2 January 2019.
^ Grossman, Gary (3 September 2020). "We're getting in the AI golden zone in between narrow and general AI". VentureBeat. Archived from the original on 4 September 2020. Retrieved 5 September 2020. Certainly, too, there are those who declare we are already seeing an early example of an AGI system in the recently revealed GPT-3 natural language processing (NLP) neural network. ... So is GPT-3 the very first example of an AGI system? This is arguable, but the consensus is that it is not AGI. ... If absolutely nothing else, GPT-3 tells us there is a happy medium in between narrow and general AI.
^ Quach, Katyanna. "A developer developed an AI chatbot utilizing GPT-3 that helped a man speak once again to his late fiancée. OpenAI shut it down". The Register. Archived from the original on 16 October 2021. Retrieved 16 October 2021.
^ Wiggers, Kyle (13 May 2022), "DeepMind's brand-new AI can perform over 600 jobs, from playing games to controlling robotics", TechCrunch, archived from the original on 16 June 2022, recovered 12 June 2022.
^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric; Kamar, Ece; Lee, Peter; Lee, Yin Tat; Li, Yuanzhi; Lundberg, Scott; Nori, Harsha; Palangi, Hamid; Ribeiro, Marco Tulio; Zhang, Yi (22 March 2023). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early try outs GPT-4". arXiv:2303.12712 [cs.CL]
^ Metz, Cade (1 May 2023). "' The Godfather of A.I.' Leaves Google and Warns of Danger Ahead". The New York City Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 7 June 2023.
^ Bove, Tristan. "A.I. could measure up to human intelligence in 'just a couple of years,' says CEO of Google's main A.I. research lab". Fortune. Retrieved 4 September 2024.
^ Nellis, Stephen (2 March 2024). "Nvidia CEO says AI could pass human tests in five years". Reuters. ^ Aschenbrenner, Leopold. "SITUATIONAL AWARENESS, The Decade Ahead".
^ Sullivan, Mark (18 October 2023). "Why everyone appears to disagree on how to specify Artificial General Intelligence". Fast Company.
^ Nosta, John (5 January 2024). "The Accelerating Path to Artificial General Intelligence". Psychology Today. Retrieved 30 March 2024.
^ Hickey, Alex. "Whole Brain Emulation: A Giant Step for Neuroscience". Tech Brew. Retrieved 8 November 2023.
^ Sandberg & Boström 2008.
^ Drachman 2005.
^ a b Russell & Norvig 2003.
^ Moravec 1988, p. 61.
^ Moravec 1998.
^ Holmgaard Mersh, Amalie (15 September 2023). "Decade-long European research study project maps the human brain". euractiv.
^ Swaminathan, Nikhil (January-February 2011). "Glia-the other brain cells". Discover. Archived from the initial on 8 February 2014. Retrieved 24 January 2014.
^ de Vega, Glenberg & Graesser 2008. A vast array of views in current research, all of which need grounding to some degree
^ Thornton, Angela (26 June 2023). "How uploading our minds to a computer system might end up being possible". The Conversation. Retrieved 8 November 2023.
^ Searle 1980
^ For example: Russell & Norvig 2003,
Oxford University Press Dictionary of Psychology Archived 3 December 2007 at the Wayback Machine (priced quote in" Encyclopedia.com"),.
MIT Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science Archived 19 July 2008 at the Wayback Machine (quoted in "AITopics"),.
Will Biological Computers Enable Artificially Intelligent Machines to Become Persons? Archived 13 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine Anthony Tongen.




^ a b c Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 947.
^ though see Explainable expert system for interest by the field about why a program behaves the way it does.
^ Chalmers, David J. (9 August 2023). "Could a Large Language Model Be Conscious?". Boston Review.
^ Seth, Anil. "Consciousness". New Scientist. Retrieved 5 September 2024.
^ Nagel 1974.
^ "The Google engineer who believes the company's AI has actually come to life". The Washington Post. 11 June 2022. Retrieved 12 June 2023.
^ Kateman, Brian (24 July 2023). "AI Should Be Terrified of Humans". TIME. Retrieved 5 September 2024.
^ Nosta, John (18 December 2023). "Should Expert System Have Rights?". Psychology Today. Retrieved 5 September 2024.
^ Akst, Daniel (10 April 2023). "Should Robots With Expert System Have Moral or Legal Rights?". The Wall Street Journal.
^ "Artificial General Intelligence - Do [es] the cost exceed benefits?". 23 August 2021. Retrieved 7 June 2023.
^ "How we can Benefit from Advancing Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) - Unite.AI". www.unite.ai. 7 April 2020. Retrieved 7 June 2023.
^ a b c Talty, Jules; Julien, Stephan. "What Will Our Society Look Like When Expert System Is Everywhere?". Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved 7 June 2023.
^ a b Stevenson, Matt (8 October 2015). "Answers to Stephen Hawking's AMA are Here!". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
^ a b Bostrom, Nick (2017 ). " § Preferred order of arrival". Superintelligence: paths, dangers, techniques (Reprinted with corrections 2017 ed.). Oxford, United Kingdom; New York, New York City, USA: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2.
^ Piper, Kelsey (19 November 2018). "How technological progress is making it likelier than ever that people will ruin ourselves". Vox. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
^ Doherty, Ben (17 May 2018). "Climate alter an 'existential security threat' to Australia, Senate questions says". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 16 July 2023.
^ MacAskill, William (2022 ). What we owe the future. New York City, NY: Basic Books. ISBN 978-1-5416-1862-6.
^ a b Ord, Toby (2020 ). "Chapter 5: Future Risks, Unaligned Artificial Intelligence". The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5266-0021-9.
^ Al-Sibai, Noor (13 February 2022). "OpenAI Chief Scientist Says Advanced AI May Already Be Conscious". Futurism. Retrieved 24 December 2023.
^ Samuelsson, Paul Conrad (2019 ). "Artificial Consciousness: Our Greatest Ethical Challenge". Philosophy Now. Retrieved 23 December 2023.
^ Kateman, Brian (24 July 2023). "AI Should Be Terrified of Humans". TIME. Retrieved 23 December 2023.
^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). "A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn". The New York City Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 24 December 2023.
^ a b "Statement on AI Risk". Center for AI Safety. 30 May 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
^ "Stephen Hawking: 'Transcendence takes a look at the ramifications of expert system - but are we taking AI seriously enough?'". The Independent (UK). Archived from the original on 25 September 2015. Retrieved 3 December 2014.
^ Herger, Mario. "The Gorilla Problem - Enterprise Garage". Retrieved 7 June 2023.
^ "The fascinating Facebook argument in between Yann LeCun, Stuart Russel and Yoshua Bengio about the threats of strong AI". The interesting Facebook debate between Yann LeCun, Stuart Russel and Yoshua Bengio about the dangers of strong AI (in French). Retrieved 8 June 2023.
^ "Will Expert System Doom The Mankind Within The Next 100 Years?". HuffPost. 22 August 2014. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
^ Sotala, Kaj; Yampolskiy, Roman V. (19 December 2014). "Responses to catastrophic AGI danger: a survey". Physica Scripta. 90 (1 ): 018001. doi:10.1088/ 0031-8949/90/ 1/018001. ISSN 0031-8949.
^ Bostrom, Nick (2014 ). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (First ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2.
^ Chow, Andrew R.; Perrigo, Billy (16 February 2023). "The AI Arms Race Is On. Start Worrying". TIME. Retrieved 24 December 2023.
^ Tetlow, Gemma (12 January 2017). "AI arms race threats spiralling out of control, report cautions". Financial Times. Archived from the initial on 11 April 2022. Retrieved 24 December 2023.
^ Milmo, Dan; Stacey, Kiran (25 September 2023). "Experts disagree over threat posed however synthetic intelligence can not be disregarded". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 24 December 2023.
^ "Humanity, Security & AI, Oh My! (with Ian Bremmer & Shuman Ghosemajumder)". CAFE. 20 July 2023. Retrieved 15 September 2023.
^ Hamblin, James (9 May 2014). "But What Would completion of Humanity Mean for Me?". The Atlantic. Archived from the initial on 4 June 2014. Retrieved 12 December 2015.
^ Titcomb, James (30 October 2023). "Big Tech is stiring worries over AI, alert scientists". The Telegraph. Retrieved 7 December 2023.
^ Davidson, John (30 October 2023). "Google Brain founder says huge tech is lying about AI termination risk". Australian Financial Review. Archived from the original on 7 December 2023. Retrieved 7 December 2023.
^ Eloundou, Tyna; Manning, Sam; Mishkin, Pamela; Rock, Daniel (17 March 2023). "GPTs are GPTs: An early take a look at the labor market effect capacity of large language designs". OpenAI. Retrieved 7 June 2023.
^ a b Hurst, Luke (23 March 2023). "OpenAI states 80% of employees might see their tasks affected by AI. These are the tasks most affected". euronews. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
^ Sheffey, Ayelet (20 August 2021). "Elon Musk states we require universal basic income since 'in the future, manual labor will be an option'". Business Insider. Archived from the initial on 9 July 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023.
Sources


UNESCO Science Report: the Race Against Time for Smarter Development. Paris: UNESCO. 11 June 2021. ISBN 978-9-2310-0450-6. Archived from the original on 18 June 2022. Retrieved 22 September 2021.
Chalmers, David (1996 ), The Conscious Mind, Oxford University Press.
Clocksin, William (August 2003), "Artificial intelligence and the future", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, vol. 361, no. 1809, pp. 1721-1748, Bibcode:2003 RSPTA.361.1721 C, doi:10.1098/ rsta.2003.1232, PMID 12952683, S2CID 31032007.
Crevier, Daniel (1993 ). AI: The Tumultuous Search for Expert System. New York, NY: BasicBooks. ISBN 0-465-02997-3.
Darrach, Brad (20 November 1970), "Meet Shakey, the First Electronic Person", Life Magazine, pp. 58-68.
Drachman, D. (2005 ), "Do we have brain to spare?", Neurology, 64 (12 ): 2004-2005, doi:10.1212/ 01. WNL.0000166914.38327. BB, PMID 15985565, S2CID 38482114.
Feigenbaum, Edward A.; McCorduck, Pamela (1983 ), The Fifth Generation: Expert System and Japan's Computer Challenge to the World, Michael Joseph, ISBN 978-0-7181-2401-4.
Goertzel, Ben; Pennachin, Cassio, eds. (2006 ), Artificial General Intelligence (PDF), Springer, ISBN 978-3-5402-3733-4, archived from the original (PDF) on 20 March 2013.
Goertzel, Ben (December 2007), "Human-level artificial basic intelligence and the possibility of a technological singularity: a reaction to Ray Kurzweil's The Singularity Is Near, and McDermott's review of Kurzweil", Artificial Intelligence, vol. 171, no. 18, Special Review Issue, pp. 1161-1173, doi:10.1016/ j.artint.2007.10.011, archived from the initial on 7 January 2016, recovered 1 April 2009.
Gubrud, Mark (November 1997), "Nanotechnology and International Security", Fifth Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology, archived from the initial on 29 May 2011, obtained 7 May 2011.
Howe, J. (November 1994), Expert System at Edinburgh University: a Perspective, archived from the original on 17 August 2007, recovered 30 August 2007.
Johnson, Mark (1987 ), The body in the mind, Chicago, ISBN 978-0-2264-0317-5.
Kurzweil, Ray (2005 ), The Singularity is Near, Viking Press.
Lighthill, Professor Sir James (1973 ), "Expert System: A General Survey", Artificial Intelligence: a paper seminar, Science Research Council.
Luger, George; Stubblefield, William (2004 ), Artificial Intelligence: Structures and Strategies for Complex Problem Solving (fifth ed.), The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., p. 720, ISBN 978-0-8053-4780-7.
McCarthy, John (2007b). What is Artificial Intelligence?. Stanford University. The supreme effort is to make computer system programs that can solve issues and attain objectives on the planet as well as people.
Moravec, Hans (1988 ), Mind Children, Harvard University Press
Moravec, Hans (1998 ), "When will computer hardware match the human brain?", Journal of Evolution and Technology, vol. 1, archived from the original on 15 June 2006, obtained 23 June 2006
Nagel (1974 ), "What Is it Like to Be a Bat" (PDF), Philosophical Review, 83 (4 ): 435-50, doi:10.2307/ 2183914, JSTOR 2183914, archived (PDF) from the initial on 16 October 2011, recovered 7 November 2009
Newell, Allen; Simon, H. A. (1976 ). "Computer Science as Empirical Inquiry: Symbols and Search". Communications of the ACM. 19 (3 ): 113-126. doi:10.1145/ 360018.360022.
Nilsson, Nils (1998 ), Expert System: A New Synthesis, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, ISBN 978-1-5586-0467-4
NRC (1999 ), "Developments in Artificial Intelligence", Funding a Revolution: Government Support for Computing Research, National Academy Press, archived from the initial on 12 January 2008, retrieved 29 September 2007
Poole, David; Mackworth, Alan; Goebel, Randy (1998 ), Computational Intelligence: A Sensible Approach, New York City: Oxford University Press, archived from the initial on 25 July 2009, retrieved 6 December 2007
Russell, Stuart J.; Norvig, Peter (2003 ), Expert System: A Modern Approach (second ed.), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-790395-2
Sandberg, Anders; Boström, Nick (2008 ), Whole Brain Emulation: A Roadmap (PDF), Technical Report # 2008-3, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University, archived (PDF) from the initial on 25 March 2020, recovered 5 April 2009
Searle, John (1980 ), "Minds, Brains and Programs" (PDF), Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3 (3 ): 417-457, doi:10.1017/ S0140525X00005756, S2CID 55303721, archived (PDF) from the initial on 17 March 2019, retrieved 3 September 2020
Simon, H. A. (1965 ), The Shape of Automation for Men and Management, New York: Harper & Row
Turing, Alan (October 1950). "Computing Machinery and Intelligence". Mind. 59 (236 ): 433-460. doi:10.1093/ mind/LIX.236.433. ISSN 1460-2113. JSTOR 2251299. S2CID 14636783.


de Vega, Manuel; Glenberg, Arthur; Graesser, Arthur, eds. (2008 ), Symbols and Embodiment: Debates on significance and cognition, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-1992-1727-4
Wang, Pei; Goertzel, Ben (2007 ). "Introduction: Aspects of Artificial General Intelligence". Advances in Artificial General Intelligence: Concepts, Architectures and Algorithms: Proceedings of the AGI Workshop 2006. IOS Press. pp. 1-16. ISBN 978-1-5860-3758-1. Archived from the initial on 18 February 2021. Retrieved 13 December 2020 - through ResearchGate.


Further reading


Aleksander, Igor (1996 ), Impossible Minds, World Scientific Publishing Company, ISBN 978-1-8609-4036-1
Azevedo FA, Carvalho LR, Grinberg LT, Farfel J, et al. (April 2009), "Equal varieties of neuronal and forum.batman.gainedge.org nonneuronal cells make the human brain an isometrically scaled-up primate brain", The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 513 (5 ): 532-541, doi:10.1002/ cne.21974, PMID 19226510, S2CID 5200449, archived from the initial on 18 February 2021, obtained 4 September 2013 - by means of ResearchGate
Berglas, Anthony (January 2012) [2008], Expert System Will Kill Our Grandchildren (Singularity), archived from the original on 23 July 2014, obtained 31 August 2012
Cukier, Kenneth, "Ready for Robots? How to Consider the Future of AI", Foreign Affairs, vol. 98, no. 4 (July/August 2019), pp. 192-98. George Dyson, historian of computing, writes (in what might be called "Dyson's Law") that "Any system simple adequate to be reasonable will not be made complex enough to act intelligently, while any system complicated enough to act smartly will be too made complex to understand." (p. 197.) Computer researcher Alex Pentland writes: "Current AI machine-learning algorithms are, at their core, dead basic dumb. They work, but they work by strength." (p. 198.).
Gelernter, David, Dream-logic, the Internet and Artificial Thought, Edge, archived from the initial on 26 July 2010, retrieved 25 July 2010.
Gleick, James, "The Fate of Free Choice" (review of Kevin J. Mitchell, Free Agents: How Evolution Gave Us Free Will, Princeton University Press, 2023, 333 pp.), The New York City Review of Books, vol. LXXI, no. 1 (18 January 2024), pp. 27-28, 30. "Agency is what distinguishes us from machines. For biological animals, reason and purpose come from acting worldwide and experiencing the consequences. Expert systems - disembodied, wiki.whenparked.com strangers to blood, sweat, and tears - have no occasion for that." (p. 30.).
Halal, William E. "TechCast Article Series: The Automation of Thought" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 6 June 2013.
- Halpern, Sue, "The Coming Tech Autocracy" (evaluation of Verity Harding, AI Needs You: How We Can Change AI's Future and Save Our Own, Princeton University Press, 274 pp.; Gary Marcus, Taming Silicon Valley: How We Can Ensure That AI Works for Us, MIT Press, 235 pp.; Daniela Rus and Gregory Mone, The Mind's Mirror: Risk and Reward in the Age of AI, Norton, 280 pp.; Madhumita Murgia, Code Dependent: Living in the Shadow of AI, Henry Holt, 311 pp.), The New York City Review of Books, vol. LXXI, no. 17 (7 November 2024), pp. 44-46. "' We can't reasonably anticipate that those who hope to get abundant from AI are going to have the interests of the rest people close at heart,' ... composes [Gary Marcus] 'We can't depend on governments driven by project finance contributions [from tech business] to press back.' ... Marcus information the demands that residents should make of their federal governments and the tech companies. They include transparency on how AI systems work; settlement for individuals if their data [are] used to train LLMs (large language model) s and engel-und-waisen.de the right to consent to this usage; and the capability to hold tech companies liable for the harms they cause by eliminating Section 230, imposing cash penalites, and passing stricter item liability laws ... Marcus likewise recommends ... that a brand-new, AI-specific federal firm, akin to the FDA, the FCC, or the FTC, may provide the most robust oversight ... [T] he Fordham law professor Chinmayi Sharma ... recommends ... establish [ing] an expert licensing routine for engineers that would work in a comparable method to medical licenses, malpractice fits, and the Hippocratic oath in medicine. 'What if, like doctors,' she asks ..., 'AI engineers also pledged to do no harm?'" (p. 46.).
Holte, R. C.; Choueiry, B. Y. (2003 ), "Abstraction and reformulation in expert system", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, vol. 358, no. 1435, pp. 1197-1204, doi:10.1098/ rstb.2003.1317, PMC 1693218, PMID 12903653.
Hughes-Castleberry, Kenna, "A Murder Mystery Puzzle: The literary puzzle Cain's Jawbone, which has actually stumped humans for years, reveals the constraints of natural-language-processing algorithms", Scientific American, vol. 329, no. 4 (November 2023), pp. 81-82. "This murder secret competition has actually revealed that although NLP (natural-language processing) models can unbelievable tasks, their capabilities are quite restricted by the amount of context they receive. This [...] could cause [troubles] for scientists who hope to utilize them to do things such as analyze ancient languages. In many cases, there are couple of historic records on long-gone civilizations to act as training information for such a purpose." (p. 82.).
Immerwahr, Daniel, "Your Lying Eyes: People now use A.I. to generate phony videos indistinguishable from genuine ones. Just how much does it matter?", The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 54-59. "If by 'deepfakes' we mean reasonable videos produced using expert system that in fact trick people, then they barely exist. The phonies aren't deep, and the deeps aren't fake. [...] A.I.-generated videos are not, in basic, operating in our media as counterfeited proof. Their role much better resembles that of animations, specifically smutty ones." (p. 59.).
- Leffer, Lauren, "The Risks of Trusting AI: We should prevent humanizing machine-learning designs utilized in clinical research", Scientific American, vol. 330, no. 6 (June 2024), pp. 80-81.
Lepore, Jill, "The Chit-Chatbot: Is talking with a maker a discussion?", The New Yorker, 7 October 2024, pp. 12-16.
Marcus, Gary, "Artificial Confidence: Even the newest, buzziest systems of artificial general intelligence are stymmied by the exact same old problems", Scientific American, vol. 327, no. 4 (October 2022), pp. 42-45.
McCarthy, John (October 2007), "From here to human-level AI", Expert System, 171 (18 ): 1174-1182, doi:10.1016/ j.artint.2007.10.009.
McCorduck, Pamela (2004 ), Machines Who Think (2nd ed.), Natick, Massachusetts: A. K. Peters, ISBN 1-5688-1205-1.
Moravec, Hans (1976 ), The Role of Raw Power in Intelligence, archived from the original on 3 March 2016, retrieved 29 September 2007.
Newell, Allen; Simon, H. A. (1963 ), "GPS: A Program that Simulates Human Thought", in Feigenbaum, E. A.; Feldman, J. (eds.), Computers and Thought, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Omohundro, Steve (2008 ), The Nature of Self-Improving Expert system, presented and distributed at the 2007 Singularity Summit, San Francisco, California.
Press, Eyal, "In Front of Their Faces: Does facial-recognition technology lead police to disregard inconsistent evidence?", The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 20-26.
Roivainen, Eka, "AI's IQ: ChatGPT aced a [basic intelligence] test however showed that intelligence can not be determined by IQ alone", Scientific American, vol. 329, no. 1 (July/August 2023), p. 7. "Despite its high IQ, ChatGPT fails at jobs that need genuine humanlike thinking or an understanding of the physical and social world ... ChatGPT appeared unable to factor realistically and tried to count on its huge database of ... realities stemmed from online texts. "
- Scharre, Paul, "Killer Apps: The Real Dangers of an AI Arms Race", Foreign Affairs, vol. 98, no. 3 (May/June 2019), pp. 135-44. "Today's AI technologies are effective but unreliable. Rules-based systems can not deal with circumstances their developers did not anticipate. Learning systems are limited by the information on which they were trained. AI failures have actually already resulted in catastrophe. Advanced auto-pilot features in cars and trucks, although they carry out well in some scenarios, have actually driven cars and trucks without alerting into trucks, concrete barriers, and parked cars. In the incorrect scenario, AI systems go from supersmart to superdumb in an immediate. When an opponent is attempting to manipulate and hack an AI system, the threats are even higher." (p. 140.).
Sutherland, J. G. (1990 ), "Holographic Model of Memory, Learning, opentx.cz and Expression", International Journal of Neural Systems, vol. 1-3, pp. 256-267.
- Vincent, James, "Horny Robot Baby Voice: James Vincent on AI chatbots", London Review of Books, vol. 46, no. 19 (10 October 2024), pp. 29-32." [AI chatbot] programs are enabled by brand-new technologies but count on the timelelss human tendency to anthropomorphise." (p. 29.).
Williams, R. W.; Herrup, K.

Meine Werkzeuge
Namensräume

Varianten
Aktionen
Navigation
Werkzeuge