Talk:AI-complete

message: I've expanded the etymology of the term.  I deleted a paragraph about problems with the AI field.  It was correct, but not related to the topic of the page.  --LC
---- 
I deleted the "MindForth" code, which does not belong here, also known as "example" in previous edits.
Montalvo 8 July 2005 05:25 (UTC)
----
If this term was coined by Fanya S. Montalvo, why is there reference for this author?--84.190.147.182 13:19, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  untitled 

message: Why is this article tagged with :Computational complexity theory? It has nothing to do with it. It just borrows from words from complexity theory. This topic would not appear in any text book on complexity theory. I removed the category, but was reverted . --Robin (talk) 14:08, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, yes I reverted.  The reasoning is that the formalisation in the article is a generalisation of conventional computational complexity: it defines a computation as having both human and computer components and there are equivalence classes of these computations.  The article Complete (complexity) is in the computational complexity category so AI-complete, as a generalisation, appears (to me) to belong there too.  It probably doesn't appear in textbooks because it's quite recent.  Disclaimer: I have no connection with this work but think it is an interesting and useful notion. pgr94 (talk) 13:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, thanks for the response. The thing is, that "complete" has an extremely precise mathematical definition on computational complexity theory. Indeed, all of computational complexity theory is very mathematical, and there are no vague notions. AI-complete, on the other hand, is a fairly vague notion, and an informal one at that. There's no mathematical problem that is proven to be AI-complete, and indeed that might not be possible, since the problem "make machines behave like humans" would not even be expressible mathematically. It seems like AI-complete borrows terminology from complexity theory just to indicate the hardness of some AI problems in an informal sense. These problems are not complete in the technical sense of complexity theory. Moreover, "AI" is not a complexity class in complexity theory, unlike NP-complete (related to the class NP (complexity)) or PSPACE-complete (related to the class PSPACE). For all these reasons, I don't think this article should be in Category: Computational complexity theory. --Robin (talk) 14:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: In my opinion we need a clear distinction between Artificial general intelligence and AI-complete in both articles. Currently they are described as being pretty much the same; even so it's somehow not easy to distinguish between them.
--89.204.154.200 (talk) 20:45, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: "AI complete" is a class of problems, "AGI" is a capability of machines. An "AI-complete" problem is a problem that requires AGI to be solved perfectly. However, "weak" or "narrow" solutions to AI-complete problems can be useful, if not perfect. ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 19:15, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distinction "Artificial general intelligence" and "AI-complete" 

message: Krishna 2409:4043:40C:E78:0:0:13A0:50A1 (talk) 13:37, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meri yah problem theek kar do 

message: Mathias R shaner aged 42 can add 2000 years to Brady and his family’s life if he wants it.   Mathias R shaner 8148800990 2600:387:15:612:0:0:0:6 (talk) 07:05, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tom Brady 

message: Techincr School ijer  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.112.230.185 (talk) 16:44, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eagles 

message: — Assignment last updated by Liliability (talk) 21:41, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP23 - Sect 201 - Thu

message: { Value } " >O< " [ #send #sender ¶ paste ¶ ("Excel format")  ::   ] 2605:B100:D22:93AE:0:11:4BF8:2F01 (talk) 09:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  send #sender ¶ paste ¶ ("Excel format")  ::   

message: The following paragraph was removed from the main article. It is 10 years old and asserts (without citation) many requirements for good machine translation. All the while current machine translation Software meets none of those requirements, yet still yields very good output. --Maximilian Janisch (talk) 16:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Machine translation