I realised that what is needed is a *joint* definition *and*  range of tests of 
AGI.

Benamin Johnston has submitted one valid test - the toy box problem. (See 
archives).

I have submitted another still simpler valid test - build a rock wall from 
rocks given, (or fill an earth hole with rocks).

However, I see that there are no valid definitions of AGI that explain what AGI 
is generally , and why these tests are indeed AGI. Google - there are v. few 
defs. of AGI or Strong AI, period.

The most common: AGI is human-level intelligence -  is an embarrassing 
non-starter - what distinguishes human intelligence? No explanation offered.

The other two are also inadequate if not as bad: Ben's "solves a variety of 
complex problems in a variety of complex environments". Nope, so does  a 
multitasking narrow AI. Complexity does not distinguish AGI. Ditto Pei's - 
something to do with "insufficient knowledge and resources..."    
"Insufficient" is open to narrow AI interpretations and reducible to 
mathematically calculable probabilities.or uncertainties. That doesn't 
distinguish AGI from narrow AI.

The one thing we should all be able to agree on (but who can be sure?) is that:

** an AGI is a general intelligence system, capable of independent learning**

i.e. capable of independently learning new activities/skills with minimal 
guidance or even, ideally, with zero guidance (as humans and animals are) - and 
thus acquiring a "general", "all-round" range of intelligence..  

This is an essential AGI goal -  the capacity to keep entering and mastering 
new domains of both mental and physical skills WITHOUT being specially 
programmed each time - that crucially distinguishes it from narrow AI's, which 
have to be individually programmed anew for each new task. Ben's AGI dog 
exemplified this in a v simple way -  the dog is supposed to be able to learn 
to fetch a ball, with only minimal instructions, as real dogs do - they can 
learn a whole variety of new skills with minimal instruction.  But I am 
confident Ben's dog can't actually do this.

However, the independent learning def. while focussing on the distinctive AGI 
goal,  still is not detailed enough by itself.

It requires further identification of the **cognitive operations** which 
distinguish AGI,  and wh. are exemplified by the above tests.

[I'll stop there for interruptions/comments & continue another time].

 P.S. Deepakjnath,

It is vital to realise that the overwhelming majority of AGI-ers do not * want* 
an AGI test -  Ben has never gone near one, and is merely typical in this 
respect. I'd put almost all AGI-ers here in the same league as the US banks, 
who only want mark-to-fantasy rather than mark-to-market tests of their assets.


-------------------------------------------
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=8660244-6e7fb59c
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to