Steve

Thank you for this. With regards  knowledge maturity, my field experiments have 
shown to be true what you just stated. Furthermore, using my knowledge-engine 
modeling technique it was learned in general that the quality of the contextual 
model was directly proportional to the quality of the knowledge input.

However, during one, particular work session I had the equivalent of 560 years' 
worth of knowledge/experience represented by my input population for a specific 
domain. In other words, there were 38 persons in the work session and their 
collective, domain knowledge equaled 560 years.

Specifically then, the session time was less than the standard, 4 hours. The 
results were exponential in relative value (when compared to at least 10 other 
sessions for the same domain), and the typical knowledge life cycle of 5 
iterations was shortened to between 2 and 3. In conclusion, high-end IQ 
contributed proportionally to this exponential result. The structured knowledge 
became the yeast to the dough and the whole became more than the sum of the 
parts.

Perhaps then not so much the age of the person, than the age of the 
knowledge/experience. Having the knowhow to translate such a body of knowledge 
in a systems format into a standard, computational model, would rapidly enable 
an AGI knowledge base. In my view, the key is the involuntary, 
context-to-computational model translator.

Where such AGI "minds" were interconnected to form a seamlessly-integrated 
larger "mind" - a knowledge singularity - aging of knowledge to achieve 
ubiquitously-held High-End IQ in each, connected AGI "mind", should be no more 
than a function of enabling hardware.

Robert Benjamin


________________________________
From: Steve Richfield via AGI <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2018 10:27 AM
To: agi
Subject: [agi] High-end IQ


IQ = 100 * mental age / physical age

For the moment, let's excuse people who aren't smart, and those who "top out" 
instead of continuing to develop through their life.

What do smart 40-year-olds have that smart 20-year-olds are missing, and then 
what do they pick up by their 60s, 80s, etc?

My own impression is that a context emerges that permits a wider range of 
thinking than younger minds can grok, based on MUCH more experience from which 
to draw understanding. A 40-year-old has TWICE the work experience of a 
30-year-old. By the time they reach 60, their work experience has doubled 
again. They have seen a LOT of things work, and have seen a LOT of things fail, 
etc.

Anyway, that is my thought, but maybe I am missing something important?

If AGIs are ever to reach some level of brilliant maturity, we need to 
understand what brilliant maturity is all about.

Thoughts?

Steve

Artificial General Intelligence List<https://agi.topicbox.com/latest> / AGI / 
see discussions<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + 
participants<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery 
options<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> 
Permalink<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tb561a65c9170651e-M24927fbd9a196e0cb5459036>

------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tb561a65c9170651e-M7d4e204c2bb77f9301b680aa
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Reply via email to