Hi Terren, > I think humans provide ample evidence that intelligence is not necessarily > correlated with processing power. The genius engineer in my example solves a > given problem with *much less* overall processing than the ordinary engineer, > so in this case intelligence is correlated with some measure of "cognitive > efficiency" (which I will leave undefined). Likewise, a grandmaster chess > player looks at a given position and can calculate a better move in one > second than you or me could come up with if we studied the board for an hour. > Grandmasters often do publicity events where they play dozens of people > simultaneously, spending just a few seconds on each board, and winning most > of the games.
What I meant was at processing power/memory Z, there is an problem solving ability Y which is the maximum. To increase the problem solving ability above Y you would have to increase processing power/memory. That is when cognitive efficiency reaches one, in your terminology. Efficiency is normally measured in ratios so that seems natural. There are things you can't model with limits of processing power/memory which restricts your ability to solve them. > Of course, you were referring to intelligence "above a certain level", but if > that level is high above human intelligence, there isn't much we can assume > about that since it is by definition unknowable by humans. > Not quite what I meant. Will ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
