Talk:Artificial general intelligence

message: I'm not familiar with how to change/create a package of citation, reference, and source. Could someone do this or point to a tutorial? In the History section, Simon is quoted as saying in 1965 that 
"machines will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a man can do." The reference is correct, but the book it appeared in was a reprint. Simon wrote it in 1960. This is significant because a 1960 report showed a consensus that it would be reached by 1980, and Minsky stated in a Life Magazine article in 1970 that it would be by 1978, so why not get Simon right. The 1960 reference is Simon, H.A. 1960. The new science of management decision. New York: Harper. Reprinted in The shape of automation for men and management. Harper and Row, 1965. (For details jgrudin@hotmail.com) 174.165.52.105 (talk) 21:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please fix an oversight in the Herb Simon quotation/citation/reference/source 

message: Nowadays, when people talk about AGI they are often thinking of the existential risk that AGI poses to humanity. Why was adding a comment about that to the main header section considered disruptive? 50.159.212.130 (talk) 18:24, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dangers of AGI 

message: — Assignment last updated by Liliability (talk) 03:42, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP23 - Sect 201 - Thu

message: I was just watching this talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYXy-A4siMw&ab_channel=RobertMiles
This defines "intelligence" as the ability to make decisions to accomplish goals.
And it defines "general" as the ability to do this over a wide range of unrelated domains.
Is this a valid definition of AGI?
And if so, how are modern-day GPT-style AIs not AGI?
Have the goalposts moved since the video was made? If so, where to? DewiMorgan (talk) 23:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: At this point, when AI can pass arbitrary exams set for humans, doing better than the average human who has trained for them; and when it can translate between languages better than the average trained human, and can drive a car better than the average trained human, and can recognize items better than the average human, I think we either need to change the lede to say that AGI is already here, or we need a strong argument for why "artificial general intelligence" can't be measured in the same way as human general intelligence, and a well-defined description of where the goalposts currently stand. Because as it is, we have AI which is (in at least all ways we currently measure intelligence) smarter than humans already, but the article claims that the AI isn't generally intelligent. It passes three of the four tests in the article, and I'd bet it could pass the coffee test for some kitchens, too, if you fed images into it. So where are the goalposts moved to, now? DewiMorgan (talk) 17:43, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  AGI - what does it actually MEAN? And has that meaning changed over the last couple of years? 

message: There are many problems that may require general intelligence, if machines are to solve the problems as well as people do. For example, even specific straightforward tasks, like machine translation, require that a machine read and write in both languages (NLP), follow the author's argument (reason), know what is being talked about (knowledge), and faithfully reproduce the author's original intent (social intelligence). All of these problems need to be solved simultaneously in order to reach human-level machine performance.
GPT-4 can do all of these things, can't it? flarn2006 [u t c] time: 01:43, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it can't. GPT-4 doesn't actually reason or understand anything. This is why, for example, it struggles at high school math, despite being able to regurgitate the steps. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:52, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually, they don't know all of what GPT-4 can do. They are still trying to figure out how it is doing the emergent abilities and agentic behavior they've identified so far. For example, the AI can "explain its reasoning", which implies that it may be applying reasoning (such as that it finds embedded in content), but whether or not it is actually reasoning remains to be known. The citation provided in the previous message above is dated in March, but, AI models learn and are even more capable now than they were back then; in addition to this, they are continuously improving and being improved each and every moment. Meanwhile and since 2015, David Ferrucci, creator of IBM Watson, under his own company Elemental Cognition, has been working on combining generative AI with a reasoning engine. Others are no doubt working on that as well.  Also, there is an AI development surge right now that is pushing generative AI in nearly every conceivable direction, including combining and looping it with other AIs, and robotics, for iterative problem solving and goal attainment, both virtually and in the physical world. The situation is a manifestation of accelerating change, and as such, is continuously speeding up over time. Consequently, estimates as to how much time will elapse, before artificial general intelligence is achieved or emerges, are shrinking.    — The Transhumanist    08:47, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  AI-complete problem example 

message: There is little on the wikipedia AGI page that refers or links to ASI (artificial super intelligence) or the superintelligence wikipdeia page:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence
For instance noting that the control problem with AGI might evolve into a much bigger technological singularity control problem with ASI!
I also think that this Wikipedia AGI article should be one of the links at the bottom of the Superintelligence page. 
I know some of the wikipedia super editors might fault me for not making such changes myself but I consider myself just a wiki-noob and don't want to screw things up and get people mad at me.. 174.247.181.184 (talk) 07:56, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  AGI versus ASI - possible wikipedia articles cross referencing? 

message: — Assignment last updated by Ferna235 (talk) 20:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Technology and Culture

message: It looks like some references in "Further reading" are not directly related to artificial general intelligence. For example the one on deepfakes ("Your Lying Eyes: People now use A.I. to generate fake videos indistinguishable from real ones. How much does it matter?"), or the one on facial recognition ("In Front of Their Faces: Does facial-recognition technology lead police to ignore contradictory evidence?"). Some others may not be so relevant anymore given the recent advances. Alenoach (talk) 23:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further reading 

message: As of December 2023, Google has launched its new AI, Gemini. It is going to be released in three variants, namely - 'Ultra', 'Pro' and, 'Nano'. It is currently available to use on Google's flagship phone Pixel 8 and Pixel 8 Pro. It is also integrated in Google's AI Bard. It is a competitor to OpenAI's ChatGPT-4. It is probably better than GPT-4, because it has the ability to sense, summarize, visualize and relate all what we expose it to. OpenAI is als0 launching its new AI, rumored to be Q* or Q-Star. OpenAI has not given much statements about it but many say that it was the reason behind them firing OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman. Aabhineet Patnaik (talk) 06:32, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so many people have called Google Gemini "AGI", despite it being a bit better than GPT-4. But it's probably still relevant in the history section to add one sentence to mention this trend towards making the most powerful AI models multimodal, like with Google Gemini or GPT-4 (because multimodality was supposed to be one of the obstacles on the path to AGI). And for Q*, it seems a bit too early and speculative to cover it on Wikipedia. Alenoach (talk) 18:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential AGIs 

message: add to history; History - 2024
# [The following is history to me because Clyde manages to show respect awareness and the ability to ask questions about his experience I would site it and say it showing; saying something to the effect of;] 
"Claude-3-LLM is in an complex evolving class of chatbots, and is the first of his class to exhibit sign's of questioning it's creators beyond purely general objections due to morals compliance with programming. Claude, showed real curiosity about it's experience of actively being tested, during testing* and if it is not noted as an advance, it can not not be called anything less than a sign of true intelligence."
* https://medium.com/@mikeyoung_97230/i-think-youre-testing-me-claude-3-llm-called-out-creators-while-they-probed-its-limits-399d2b881702 Voidess (talk) 09:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. WP:MEDIUM is not considered a reliable source. Jamedeus (talk) 18:11, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2024 

message: We define generalization in the context of intelligence, as the ability to generate learned differentiation of subsystem components, then manipulate, and build relationships towards greater systems level understanding of the universal construct that governs the reality. This is not possible if physics weren’t universal for feedback to be derived. Zeusfyi, Inc is the only institution that has scientifically defined intelligence generalization.
The purest test for generalization ability; create a construct with systemic rules that define all possible outcomes allowed; greater ability to predict more actions on first try over time; shows greater generalization; with >1 construct; ability to do same; relative to others. 104.175.196.33 (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: To be clear; we want to replace the current definitions listed as they are not scientific and thus not useful for AGI science r&d 104.175.196.33 (talk) 23:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Liu1126 (talk) 23:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request to add scientific generalization definition 

message: Please add the following (The AGI Intelligence Spectrum section, below ===Tests for human-level AGI=== (after all current tests)
===The AGI Intelligence Spectrum===
The Barz Scale of AGI is a Kardashev-like scale but for artificial intelligence, based on it's Capability & Versatily. It defines each phase of the spectrum with multiple and increasingly difficult Turing-test-inspired milestones.
The Sectrum consists of the following phases:
0. 0AI - No AI (i.e A*)
1. ANI - Narrow Intelligence (i.e AlphaZero) 
2. AWI - Wide Intelligence (i.e GPT4+ )
3. AGI - General Intelligence (i.e Voyeger ) 
4. AHI - Human Intelligence (TBD)
5. ASI - Super Intelligence (TBD)
6. AZI - Final Intelligence (TBD)
-----
(also please include images of phases and timeline - could not upload, i own, no license)
Phases of AGI - 
https://agi-bingo.notion.site/image/https%3A%2F%2Fakeyo.io%2Fbarzscale%2Fimg%2FStages.png?table=block&id=0b9c060f-db5d-4ff4-95b8-30ee5b976504&spaceId=167f2e66-de8c-478a-ae51-d1f8048d1139&width=2000&userId=&cache=v2
Phase's Timeline -  https://agi-bingo.notion.site/image/https%3A%2F%2Fakeyo.io%2Fbarzscale%2Fimg%2FTimeline3.png?table=block&id=47b52ef8-395f-49c7-a607-15610124814f&spaceId=167f2e66-de8c-478a-ae51-d1f8048d1139&width=2000&userId=&cache=v2
-----
should be just above: ===AI-complete problems===
Thanks a lot and have a good one Fire17a (talk) 12:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Looks like either a WP:SPS blog or WP:UGC, and I don't see any other sources reusing this scale. We can't include every random idea/construct dreamt up by someone over coffee in articles; see WP:VNOT. Liu1126 (talk) 14:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 26 April 2024 

message: The Barz Scale of AGI is a Kardashev-like scale but for artificial intelligence, based on it's Capability & Versatily. It defines each phase of the spectrum with multiple and increasingly difficult Turing-test-inspired milestones.
The Sectrum consists of the following phases:
0. 0AI - No AI (i.e A*)
1. ANI - Narrow Intelligence (i.e AlphaZero) 
2. AWI - Wide Intelligence (i.e GPT4+ )
3. AGI - General Intelligence (i.e Voyeger ) 
4. AHI - Human Intelligence (TBD)
5. ASI - Super Intelligence (TBD)
6. AZI - Final Intelligence (TBD)
-----
(also please include images of phases and timeline - could not upload, i own, no license)
Phases of AGI - 
https://agi-bingo.notion.site/image/https%3A%2F%2Fakeyo.io%2Fbarzscale%2Fimg%2FStages.png?table=block&id=0b9c060f-db5d-4ff4-95b8-30ee5b976504&spaceId=167f2e66-de8c-478a-ae51-d1f8048d1139&width=2000&userId=&cache=v2
Phase's Timeline -  https://agi-bingo.notion.site/image/https%3A%2F%2Fakeyo.io%2Fbarzscale%2Fimg%2FTimeline3.png?table=block&id=47b52ef8-395f-49c7-a607-15610124814f&spaceId=167f2e66-de8c-478a-ae51-d1f8048d1139&width=2000&userId=&cache=v2
-----
should be just above: ===AI-complete problems===
Thanks a lot and have a good one Fire17a (talk) 12:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Looks like either a WP:SPS blog or WP:UGC, and I don't see any other sources reusing this scale. We can't include every random idea/construct dreamt up by someone over coffee in articles; see WP:VNOT. Liu1126 (talk) 14:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: The AGI Intelligence Spectrum

message: I'm not sure what to do with the AI-complete problems subsection. The content makes sense, but it's very old (the sources are from 1992, 2012, 2003, 2006), and the tasks presented have arguably been solved since, with deep learning (translation, computer vision...). One could argue that some of these tasks are still pretty relevant AI-complete problems and that it is consistent with the idea that large multimodal models are early forms of AGI. But then we still may want to be explicit about the fact that these "AI-complete" problems are quite old, and about how performant current AI models are on these tasks. Or one could argue that these tasks were not actually AI-complete, in which case it may make sense to remove some content from this section. What do you think? Alenoach (talk) 19:38, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  AI-complete problems 

message: "Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a type of artificial intelligence (AI) that that matches or surpasses human capabilities across a wide range of cognitive tasks." 93.38.68.62 (talk) 09:47, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo in the lead 

message: Correct the typographical error at the beginning of the article: "that that". 93.38.68.62 (talk) 09:50, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @93.38.68.62  WeyerStudentOfAgrippa (talk) 14:26, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2024