Freech!

Artificial basic intelligence (AGI) is a kind of expert system (AI) that matches or exceeds human cognitive abilities across a large range of cognitive tasks. This contrasts with narrow AI, which is restricted to specific tasks. [1] Artificial superintelligence (ASI), on the other hand, describes AGI that significantly goes beyond human cognitive abilities. AGI is considered among the definitions of strong AI.

Creating AGI is a primary goal of AI research study and of business such as OpenAI [2] and Meta. [3] A 2020 survey recognized 72 active AGI research and advancement jobs across 37 countries. [4]

The timeline for attaining AGI stays a topic of ongoing argument among scientists and experts. As of 2023, some argue that it might be possible in years or decades; others keep it may take a century or longer; a minority think it may never ever be attained; and another minority declares that it is already here. [5] [6] Notable AI scientist Geoffrey Hinton has revealed concerns about the rapid development towards AGI, recommending it could be attained quicker than many anticipate. [7]

There is argument on the specific meaning of AGI and relating to whether modern big language designs (LLMs) such as GPT-4 are early kinds of AGI. [8] AGI is a common topic in sci-fi and futures studies. [9] [10]

Contention exists over whether AGI represents an existential danger. [11] [12] [13] Many specialists on AI have mentioned that mitigating the threat of human extinction positioned by AGI must be an international priority. [14] [15] Others find the development of AGI to be too remote to present such a danger. [16] [17]

Terminology

AGI is also referred to as strong AI, [18] [19] full AI, [20] human-level AI, [5] human-level intelligent AI, or general smart action. [21]

Some scholastic sources reserve the term "strong AI" for computer system programs that experience sentience or consciousness. [a] On the other hand, weak AI (or narrow AI) has the ability to solve one particular problem but does not have basic cognitive abilities. [22] [19] Some scholastic sources use "weak AI" to refer more broadly to any programs that neither experience awareness nor have a mind in the very same sense as human beings. [a]

Related concepts consist of synthetic superintelligence and transformative AI. A synthetic superintelligence (ASI) is a hypothetical kind of AGI that is a lot more usually smart than people, [23] while the notion of transformative AI connects to AI having a large impact on society, for instance, similar to the farming or industrial transformation. [24]

A framework for smfsimple.com classifying AGI in levels was proposed in 2023 by Google DeepMind researchers. They specify 5 levels of AGI: emerging, skilled, expert, virtuoso, and superhuman. For example, a skilled AGI is specified as an AI that exceeds 50% of competent adults in a wide variety of non-physical tasks, and a superhuman AGI (i.e. a synthetic superintelligence) is similarly defined however with a limit of 100%. They think about big language designs like ChatGPT or LLaMA 2 to be instances of emerging AGI. [25]

Characteristics

Various popular definitions of intelligence have been proposed. One of the leading propositions is the Turing test. However, there are other widely known definitions, and some researchers disagree with the more popular approaches. [b]

Intelligence qualities

Researchers generally hold that intelligence is required to do all of the following: [27]

reason, use method, solve puzzles, and make judgments under uncertainty represent knowledge, consisting of sound judgment understanding plan learn - communicate in natural language - if necessary, incorporate these skills in completion of any offered goal
Many interdisciplinary approaches (e.g. cognitive science, computational intelligence, and choice making) think about extra qualities such as imagination (the ability to form unique psychological images and ideas) [28] and autonomy. [29]

Computer-based systems that display a number of these abilities exist (e.g. see computational creativity, automated reasoning, choice support group, robotic, evolutionary computation, intelligent representative). There is debate about whether contemporary AI systems have them to an adequate degree.

Physical characteristics

Other abilities are considered preferable in intelligent systems, as they might affect intelligence or help in its expression. These consist of: [30]

- the ability to sense (e.g. see, hear, and qoocle.com so on), and - the ability to act (e.g. move and manipulate items, modification area to check out, and so on).
This consists of the ability to find and react to risk. [31]

Although the ability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc) and the capability to act (e.g. relocation and control things, change area to explore, etc) can be preferable for some smart systems, [30] these physical capabilities are not strictly needed for an entity to qualify as AGI-particularly under the thesis that large language models (LLMs) may currently be or end up being AGI. Even from a less positive perspective on LLMs, there is no company requirement for an AGI to have a human-like kind; being a silicon-based computational system suffices, supplied it can process input (language) from the external world in place of human senses. This analysis aligns with the understanding that AGI has actually never been proscribed a specific physical personification and therefore does not require a capacity for locomotion or traditional "eyes and ears". [32]

Tests for human-level AGI

Several tests suggested to validate human-level AGI have actually been considered, consisting of: [33] [34]

The concept of the test is that the device has to try and pretend to be a man, by answering concerns put to it, and it will just pass if the pretence is reasonably persuading. A significant portion of a jury, who should not be skilled about devices, must be taken in by the pretence. [37]

AI-complete problems

A problem is informally called "AI-complete" or "AI-hard" if it is thought that in order to solve it, one would need to carry out AGI, since the option is beyond the capabilities of a purpose-specific algorithm. [47]

There are numerous issues that have been conjectured to need general intelligence to fix as well as humans. Examples include computer system vision, natural language understanding, and dealing with unanticipated situations while resolving any real-world problem. [48] Even a specific job like translation requires a maker to read and write in both languages, follow the author's argument (reason), understand the context (knowledge), and faithfully recreate the author's original intent (social intelligence). All of these issues require to be resolved simultaneously in order to reach human-level machine efficiency.

However, a number of these jobs can now be performed by contemporary big language designs. According to Stanford University's 2024 AI index, AI has actually reached human-level performance on many criteria for checking out comprehension and visual reasoning. [49]

History

Classical AI

Modern AI research study began in the mid-1950s. [50] The first generation of AI researchers were persuaded that artificial general intelligence was possible and that it would exist in simply a few years. [51] AI leader Herbert A. Simon composed in 1965: "devices will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a guy can do." [52]

Their predictions were the motivation for Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke's character HAL 9000, who embodied what AI scientists believed they could develop by the year 2001. AI pioneer Marvin Minsky was a consultant [53] on the job of making HAL 9000 as practical as possible according to the agreement forecasts of the time. He said in 1967, "Within a generation ... the issue of developing 'expert system' will considerably be solved". [54]

Several classical AI tasks, such as Doug Lenat's Cyc job (that started in 1984), and Allen Newell's Soar project, were directed at AGI.

However, in the early 1970s, it ended up being apparent that researchers had grossly underestimated the trouble of the project. Funding companies became skeptical of AGI and mariskamast.net put scientists under increasing pressure to produce useful "used AI". [c] In the early 1980s, Japan's Fifth Generation Computer Project restored interest in AGI, setting out a ten-year timeline that consisted of AGI objectives like "bring on a casual discussion". [58] In action to this and the success of specialist systems, both market and federal government pumped cash into the field. [56] [59] However, self-confidence in AI spectacularly collapsed in the late 1980s, and the objectives of the Fifth Generation Computer Project were never ever satisfied. [60] For the second time in twenty years, AI scientists who anticipated the impending accomplishment of AGI had been misinterpreted. By the 1990s, AI scientists had a track record for making vain pledges. They became unwilling to make predictions at all [d] and avoided mention of "human level" expert system for fear of being labeled "wild-eyed dreamer [s]. [62]

Narrow AI research

In the 1990s and early 21st century, mainstream AI accomplished business success and academic respectability by concentrating on particular sub-problems where AI can produce verifiable results and commercial applications, such as speech acknowledgment and recommendation algorithms. [63] These "applied AI" systems are now used extensively throughout the technology industry, and research study in this vein is heavily funded in both academia and industry. As of 2018 [update], development in this field was considered an emerging pattern, and a mature stage was anticipated to be reached in more than ten years. [64]

At the turn of the century, lots of mainstream AI scientists [65] hoped that strong AI might be developed by combining programs that fix different sub-problems. Hans Moravec composed in 1988:

I am confident that this bottom-up route to artificial intelligence will one day satisfy the conventional top-down route more than half method, prepared to supply the real-world skills and the commonsense knowledge that has been so frustratingly evasive in reasoning programs. Fully smart devices will result when the metaphorical golden spike is driven unifying the two efforts. [65]

However, even at the time, this was challenged. For instance, Stevan Harnad of Princeton University concluded his 1990 paper on the symbol grounding hypothesis by mentioning:

The expectation has often been voiced that "top-down" (symbolic) approaches to modeling cognition will in some way satisfy "bottom-up" (sensory) approaches somewhere in between. If the grounding considerations in this paper stand, then this expectation is hopelessly modular and there is truly only one viable route from sense to symbols: from the ground up. A free-floating symbolic level like the software level of a computer system will never be reached by this path (or vice versa) - nor is it clear why we should even try to reach such a level, because it appears getting there would simply amount to uprooting our signs from their intrinsic meanings (thus simply decreasing ourselves to the practical equivalent of a programmable computer). [66]

Modern artificial general intelligence research study

The term "synthetic general intelligence" was used as early as 1997, by Mark Gubrud [67] in a conversation of the ramifications of totally automated military production and operations. A mathematical formalism of AGI was proposed by Marcus Hutter in 2000. Named AIXI, the proposed AGI representative increases "the capability to satisfy goals in a broad variety of environments". [68] This type of AGI, identified by the ability to increase a mathematical meaning of intelligence rather than display human-like behaviour, [69] was likewise called universal artificial intelligence. [70]

The term AGI was re-introduced and promoted by Shane Legg and Ben Goertzel around 2002. [71] AGI research activity in 2006 was explained by Pei Wang and Ben Goertzel [72] as "producing publications and initial results". The very first summer season school in AGI was arranged in Xiamen, China in 2009 [73] by the Xiamen university's Artificial Brain Laboratory and OpenCog. The first university course was given up 2010 [74] and 2011 [75] at Plovdiv University, Bulgaria by Todor Arnaudov. MIT provided a course on AGI in 2018, arranged by Lex Fridman and featuring a variety of guest speakers.

As of 2023 [upgrade], a little number of computer system scientists are active in AGI research, and lots of add to a series of AGI conferences. However, significantly more scientists are interested in open-ended knowing, [76] [77] which is the idea of allowing AI to continually learn and innovate like human beings do.

Feasibility

As of 2023, the advancement and prospective achievement of AGI remains a topic of extreme argument within the AI community. While standard consensus held that AGI was a distant goal, recent improvements have actually led some researchers and industry figures to declare that early types of AGI may currently exist. [78] AI pioneer Herbert A. Simon speculated in 1965 that "machines will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a man can do". This forecast stopped working to come real. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen believed that such intelligence is not likely in the 21st century since it would need "unforeseeable and essentially unforeseeable advancements" and a "scientifically deep understanding of cognition". [79] Writing in The Guardian, roboticist Alan Winfield claimed the gulf in between modern computing and human-level expert system is as wide as the gulf in between existing area flight and useful faster-than-light spaceflight. [80]

A further challenge is the absence of clearness in defining what intelligence entails. Does it need consciousness? Must it display the ability to set goals along with pursue them? Is it purely a matter of scale such that if design sizes increase adequately, intelligence will emerge? Are centers such as preparation, thinking, and causal understanding required? Does intelligence need explicitly reproducing the brain and its particular professors? Does it need emotions? [81]

Most AI researchers believe strong AI can be achieved in the future, but some thinkers, like Hubert Dreyfus and Roger Penrose, deny the possibility of achieving strong AI. [82] [83] John McCarthy is among those who think human-level AI will be accomplished, but that today level of progress is such that a date can not precisely be anticipated. [84] AI experts' views on the expediency of AGI wax and wane. Four polls carried out in 2012 and 2013 suggested that the typical price quote amongst experts for when they would be 50% positive AGI would get here was 2040 to 2050, depending on the poll, with the mean being 2081. Of the experts, 16.5% answered with "never" when asked the very same question however with a 90% confidence instead. [85] [86] Further current AGI progress factors to consider can be found above Tests for validating human-level AGI.

A report by Stuart Armstrong and Kaj Sotala of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute found that "over [a] 60-year amount of time there is a strong predisposition towards forecasting the arrival of human-level AI as between 15 and 25 years from the time the forecast was made". They examined 95 forecasts made in between 1950 and 2012 on when human-level AI will happen. [87]

In 2023, Microsoft scientists released a detailed assessment of GPT-4. They concluded: "Given the breadth and depth of GPT-4's abilities, we believe that it might fairly be considered as an early (yet still insufficient) variation of a synthetic basic intelligence (AGI) system." [88] Another research study in 2023 reported that GPT-4 outperforms 99% of human beings on the Torrance tests of creativity. [89] [90]

Blaise Agüera y Arcas and Peter Norvig composed in 2023 that a significant level of general intelligence has actually currently been accomplished with frontier models. They wrote that unwillingness to this view originates from four main reasons: a "healthy hesitation about metrics for AGI", an "ideological commitment to alternative AI theories or methods", a "devotion to human (or biological) exceptionalism", or a "concern about the economic implications of AGI". [91]

2023 likewise marked the introduction of big multimodal models (big language models capable of processing or creating several techniques such as text, audio, and images). [92]

In 2024, OpenAI launched o1-preview, the very first of a series of models that "invest more time thinking before they react". According to Mira Murati, this ability to believe before reacting represents a new, extra paradigm. It improves design outputs by investing more computing power when creating the answer, whereas the design scaling paradigm enhances outputs by increasing the design size, training information and training compute power. [93] [94]

An OpenAI worker, Vahid Kazemi, claimed in 2024 that the business had actually attained AGI, specifying, "In my viewpoint, we have already accomplished AGI and it's even more clear with O1." Kazemi clarified that while the AI is not yet "much better than any human at any job", it is "better than a lot of human beings at a lot of jobs." He also dealt with criticisms that big language models (LLMs) merely follow predefined patterns, comparing their learning procedure to the clinical method of observing, hypothesizing, and verifying. These declarations have actually sparked argument, as they count on a broad and unconventional definition of AGI-traditionally understood as AI that matches human intelligence throughout all domains. Critics argue that, while OpenAI's designs show impressive versatility, they might not fully meet this standard. Notably, Kazemi's comments came quickly after OpenAI removed "AGI" from the regards to its partnership with Microsoft, triggering speculation about the business's strategic intentions. [95]

Timescales

Progress in artificial intelligence has historically gone through periods of rapid development separated by durations when development appeared to stop. [82] Ending each hiatus were basic advances in hardware, software application or both to create area for more progress. [82] [98] [99] For instance, the computer hardware offered in the twentieth century was not sufficient to implement deep learning, which needs big numbers of GPU-enabled CPUs. [100]

In the intro to his 2006 book, [101] Goertzel states that estimates of the time needed before a really versatile AGI is developed differ from 10 years to over a century. As of 2007 [update], the agreement in the AGI research community appeared to be that the timeline talked about by Ray Kurzweil in 2005 in The Singularity is Near [102] (i.e. in between 2015 and 2045) was plausible. [103] Mainstream AI researchers have actually given a large range of viewpoints on whether development will be this rapid. A 2012 meta-analysis of 95 such viewpoints discovered a bias towards forecasting that the beginning of AGI would occur within 16-26 years for modern and historic predictions alike. That paper has actually been criticized for how it classified viewpoints as professional or non-expert. [104]

In 2012, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton developed a neural network called AlexNet, which won the ImageNet competitors with a top-5 test error rate of 15.3%, substantially better than the second-best entry's rate of 26.3% (the standard method used a weighted amount of scores from various pre-defined classifiers). [105] AlexNet was related to as the initial ground-breaker of the current deep learning wave. [105]

In 2017, scientists Feng Liu, Yong Shi, and Ying Liu conducted intelligence tests on openly readily available and easily accessible weak AI such as Google AI, Apple's Siri, and others. At the maximum, these AIs reached an IQ worth of about 47, which corresponds approximately to a six-year-old kid in very first grade. A grownup concerns about 100 usually. Similar tests were performed in 2014, with the IQ score reaching a maximum worth of 27. [106] [107]

In 2020, OpenAI developed GPT-3, a language model efficient in carrying out many varied tasks without particular training. According to Gary Grossman in a VentureBeat article, while there is consensus that GPT-3 is not an example of AGI, it is thought about by some to be too advanced to be classified as a narrow AI system. [108]

In the same year, Jason Rohrer utilized his GPT-3 account to develop a chatbot, and provided a chatbot-developing platform called "Project December". OpenAI asked for changes to the chatbot to abide by their security standards; Rohrer detached Project December from the GPT-3 API. [109]

In 2022, DeepMind developed Gato, a "general-purpose" system efficient in carrying out more than 600 various tasks. [110]

In 2023, Microsoft Research published a study on an early variation of OpenAI's GPT-4, contending that it showed more general intelligence than previous AI models and showed human-level efficiency in tasks spanning numerous domains, such as mathematics, coding, and law. This research study stimulated a debate on whether GPT-4 could be thought about an early, insufficient variation of artificial basic intelligence, emphasizing the need for more exploration and assessment of such systems. [111]

In 2023, the AI researcher Geoffrey Hinton specified that: [112]

The idea that this things might in fact get smarter than individuals - a couple of individuals thought that, [...] But a lot of individuals thought it was method off. And I believed it was way off. I believed it was 30 to 50 years or perhaps longer away. Obviously, I no longer think that.

In May 2023, Demis Hassabis likewise stated that "The development in the last couple of years has actually been pretty amazing", and that he sees no reason that it would slow down, expecting AGI within a years or even a couple of years. [113] In March 2024, Nvidia's CEO, Jensen Huang, specified his expectation that within five years, AI would be capable of passing any test at least as well as human beings. [114] In June 2024, the AI scientist Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former OpenAI worker, approximated AGI by 2027 to be "strikingly plausible". [115]

Whole brain emulation

While the development of transformer designs like in ChatGPT is considered the most promising path to AGI, [116] [117] whole brain emulation can serve as an alternative approach. With entire brain simulation, a brain model is developed by scanning and mapping a biological brain in detail, and after that copying and imitating it on a computer system or another computational device. The simulation design must be sufficiently loyal to the original, so that it acts in almost the exact same method as the initial brain. [118] Whole brain emulation is a type of brain simulation that is talked about in computational neuroscience and neuroinformatics, and for medical research study functions. It has been talked about in expert system research study [103] as an approach to strong AI. Neuroimaging technologies that could provide the needed in-depth understanding are improving rapidly, and futurist Ray Kurzweil in the book The Singularity Is Near [102] forecasts that a map of enough quality will appear on a comparable timescale to the computing power needed to imitate it.

Early approximates

For low-level brain simulation, a really powerful cluster of computer systems or GPUs would be needed, given the enormous quantity of synapses within the human brain. Each of the 1011 (one hundred billion) nerve cells has on typical 7,000 synaptic connections (synapses) to other nerve cells. The brain of a three-year-old kid has about 1015 synapses (1 quadrillion). This number declines with age, supporting by the adult years. Estimates vary for an adult, varying from 1014 to 5 × 1014 synapses (100 to 500 trillion). [120] A quote of the brain's processing power, based on an easy switch model for neuron activity, is around 1014 (100 trillion) synaptic updates per second (SUPS). [121]

In 1997, Kurzweil took a look at numerous estimates for the hardware needed to equal the human brain and adopted a figure of 1016 calculations per 2nd (cps). [e] (For contrast, if a "calculation" was equivalent to one "floating-point operation" - a procedure utilized to rate present supercomputers - then 1016 "computations" would be equivalent to 10 petaFLOPS, achieved in 2011, while 1018 was accomplished in 2022.) He utilized this figure to forecast the needed hardware would be offered sometime in between 2015 and 2025, if the rapid development in computer power at the time of composing continued.

Current research study

The Human Brain Project, an EU-funded effort active from 2013 to 2023, has developed an especially detailed and openly available atlas of the human brain. [124] In 2023, scientists from Duke University carried out a high-resolution scan of a mouse brain.

Criticisms of simulation-based techniques

The synthetic neuron design presumed by Kurzweil and utilized in lots of present artificial neural network implementations is basic compared with biological nerve cells. A brain simulation would likely need to capture the in-depth cellular behaviour of biological neurons, presently comprehended just in broad overview. The overhead introduced by complete modeling of the biological, chemical, and physical details of neural behaviour (particularly on a molecular scale) would need computational powers numerous orders of magnitude bigger than Kurzweil's estimate. In addition, the estimates do not account for glial cells, which are understood to play a function in cognitive procedures. [125]

An essential criticism of the simulated brain technique obtains from embodied cognition theory which asserts that human embodiment is an essential aspect of human intelligence and is required to ground significance. [126] [127] If this theory is right, any completely practical brain design will require to incorporate more than just the nerve cells (e.g., a robotic body). Goertzel [103] proposes virtual personification (like in metaverses like Second Life) as an option, but it is unknown whether this would suffice.

Philosophical perspective

"Strong AI" as defined in viewpoint

In 1980, thinker John Searle coined the term "strong AI" as part of his Chinese space argument. [128] He proposed a difference between 2 hypotheses about expert system: [f]

Strong AI hypothesis: An artificial intelligence system can have "a mind" and "awareness". Weak AI hypothesis: An expert system system can (just) imitate it thinks and has a mind and awareness.
The first one he called "strong" due to the fact that it makes a stronger statement: it assumes something unique has actually taken place to the device that surpasses those capabilities that we can check. The behaviour of a "weak AI" maker would be exactly similar to a "strong AI" machine, but the latter would likewise have subjective mindful experience. This usage is likewise typical in scholastic AI research study and books. [129]

In contrast to Searle and traditional AI, some futurists such as Ray Kurzweil use the term "strong AI" to indicate "human level artificial general intelligence". [102] This is not the very same as Searle's strong AI, unless it is presumed that awareness is required for human-level AGI. Academic thinkers such as Searle do not think that holds true, and to most expert system researchers the question is out-of-scope. [130]

Mainstream AI is most interested in how a program acts. [131] According to Russell and Norvig, "as long as the program works, they don't care if you call it genuine or a simulation." [130] If the program can act as if it has a mind, then there is no requirement to know if it really has mind - indeed, there would be no chance to tell. For AI research, Searle's "weak AI hypothesis" is equivalent to the declaration "synthetic general intelligence is possible". Thus, according to Russell and Norvig, "most AI scientists take the weak AI hypothesis for granted, and do not care about the strong AI hypothesis." [130] Thus, for scholastic AI research study, "Strong AI" and "AGI" are 2 various things.

Consciousness

Consciousness can have different meanings, and some elements play substantial functions in sci-fi and the principles of synthetic intelligence:

Sentience (or "incredible consciousness"): The capability to "feel" perceptions or emotions subjectively, rather than the ability to factor about perceptions. Some theorists, such as David Chalmers, utilize the term "consciousness" to refer solely to phenomenal awareness, which is approximately comparable to life. [132] Determining why and how subjective experience emerges is called the difficult problem of consciousness. [133] Thomas Nagel explained in 1974 that it "seems like" something to be conscious. If we are not conscious, then it doesn't seem like anything. Nagel utilizes the example of a bat: we can smartly ask "what does it seem like to be a bat?" However, we are not likely to ask "what does it seem like to be a toaster?" Nagel concludes that a bat appears to be conscious (i.e., has awareness) however a toaster does not. [134] In 2022, a Google engineer declared that the company's AI chatbot, LaMDA, had achieved life, though this claim was widely challenged by other experts. [135]
Self-awareness: To have conscious awareness of oneself as a different individual, especially to be knowingly mindful of one's own ideas. This is opposed to just being the "topic of one's believed"-an operating system or debugger is able to be "aware of itself" (that is, to represent itself in the same way it represents whatever else)-but this is not what individuals generally mean when they use the term "self-awareness". [g]
These traits have an ethical dimension. AI sentience would trigger concerns of well-being and legal security, likewise to animals. [136] Other aspects of consciousness related to cognitive abilities are likewise pertinent to the idea of AI rights. [137] Determining how to integrate advanced AI with existing legal and social structures is an emergent problem. [138]

Benefits

AGI might have a variety of applications. If oriented towards such goals, AGI might assist mitigate different problems worldwide such as cravings, hardship and health issues. [139]

AGI could improve performance and performance in a lot of jobs. For instance, in public health, AGI could accelerate medical research, significantly versus cancer. [140] It might take care of the elderly, [141] and equalize access to rapid, premium medical diagnostics. It could use fun, cheap and tailored education. [141] The need to work to subsist might end up being obsolete if the wealth produced is effectively redistributed. [141] [142] This likewise raises the question of the location of people in a radically automated society.

AGI might likewise assist to make reasonable decisions, and to prepare for and avoid catastrophes. It might likewise help to profit of possibly disastrous technologies such as nanotechnology or climate engineering, while avoiding the associated threats. [143] If an AGI's primary objective is to avoid existential disasters such as human termination (which could be tough if the Vulnerable World Hypothesis ends up being true), [144] it might take measures to significantly decrease the threats [143] while minimizing the impact of these measures on our lifestyle.

Risks

Existential threats

AGI might represent numerous kinds of existential risk, which are threats that threaten "the premature extinction of Earth-originating intelligent life or the irreversible and drastic damage of its capacity for desirable future advancement". [145] The threat of human extinction from AGI has been the subject of numerous debates, but there is also the possibility that the development of AGI would lead to a completely problematic future. Notably, it might be used to spread out and protect the set of worths of whoever establishes it. If humanity still has moral blind areas similar to slavery in the past, AGI may irreversibly entrench it, avoiding ethical development. [146] Furthermore, AGI might facilitate mass surveillance and indoctrination, which might be used to create a steady repressive around the world totalitarian routine. [147] [148] There is likewise a risk for the machines themselves. If makers that are sentient or otherwise deserving of moral factor to consider are mass created in the future, taking part in a civilizational path that indefinitely neglects their welfare and interests could be an existential catastrophe. [149] [150] Considering how much AGI could improve humanity's future and help in reducing other existential dangers, Toby Ord calls these existential threats "an argument for proceeding with due care", not for "abandoning AI". [147]

Risk of loss of control and human extinction

The thesis that AI poses an existential risk for human beings, which this threat needs more attention, is questionable but has been backed in 2023 by numerous public figures, AI researchers and CEOs of AI business such as Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Demis Hassabis and Sam Altman. [151] [152]

In 2014, Stephen Hawking criticized widespread indifference:

So, facing possible futures of incalculable advantages and risks, the professionals are surely doing everything possible to guarantee the finest result, right? Wrong. If an exceptional alien civilisation sent us a message stating, 'We'll arrive in a few years,' would we simply reply, 'OK, call us when you get here-we'll leave the lights on?' Probably not-but this is basically what is occurring with AI. [153]

The prospective fate of humankind has in some cases been compared to the fate of gorillas threatened by human activities. The contrast mentions that greater intelligence allowed humanity to dominate gorillas, which are now susceptible in ways that they might not have prepared for. As a result, the gorilla has become an endangered species, not out of malice, however merely as a civilian casualties from human activities. [154]

The skeptic Yann LeCun considers that AGIs will have no desire to control humanity which we must beware not to anthropomorphize them and interpret their intents as we would for humans. He said that people will not be "smart enough to develop super-intelligent devices, yet extremely dumb to the point of giving it moronic goals with no safeguards". [155] On the other side, the idea of critical convergence recommends that practically whatever their objectives, smart agents will have factors to try to endure and obtain more power as intermediary steps to achieving these objectives. And that this does not require having emotions. [156]

Many scholars who are concerned about existential risk advocate for more research study into resolving the "control issue" to address the concern: what kinds of safeguards, algorithms, or architectures can developers implement to increase the possibility that their recursively-improving AI would continue to behave in a friendly, rather than harmful, way after it reaches superintelligence? [157] [158] Solving the control issue is complicated by the AI arms race (which might cause a race to the bottom of safety preventative measures in order to release items before competitors), [159] and making use of AI in weapon systems. [160]

The thesis that AI can position existential risk likewise has detractors. Skeptics generally state that AGI is unlikely in the short-term, or that concerns about AGI sidetrack from other problems connected to current AI. [161] Former Google fraud czar Shuman Ghosemajumder thinks about that for many people beyond the innovation industry, existing chatbots and LLMs are already viewed as though they were AGI, resulting in additional misconception and fear. [162]

Skeptics often charge that the thesis is crypto-religious, with an unreasonable belief in the possibility of superintelligence changing an irrational belief in an omnipotent God. [163] Some scientists think that the interaction projects on AI existential risk by specific AI groups (such as OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepMind, and Conjecture) may be an at effort at regulatory capture and to pump up interest in their products. [164] [165]

In 2023, the CEOs of Google DeepMind, OpenAI and Anthropic, in addition to other industry leaders and researchers, issued a joint declaration asserting that "Mitigating the danger of extinction from AI must be a global priority alongside other societal-scale threats such as pandemics and nuclear war." [152]

Mass unemployment

Researchers from OpenAI estimated that "80% of the U.S. workforce could have at least 10% of their work jobs impacted by the introduction of LLMs, while around 19% of employees may see at least 50% of their tasks affected". [166] [167] They think about workplace employees to be the most exposed, for instance mathematicians, accountants or web designers. [167] AGI might have a better autonomy, capability to make decisions, to user interface with other computer system tools, however likewise to manage robotized bodies.

According to Stephen Hawking, the outcome of automation on the lifestyle will depend on how the wealth will be rearranged: [142]

Everyone can delight in a life of elegant leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or a lot of people can wind up badly bad if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality

Elon Musk thinks about that the automation of society will require federal governments to embrace a universal basic income. [168]

See likewise

Artificial brain - Software and hardware with cognitive abilities similar to those of the animal or human brain AI result AI safety - Research area on making AI safe and helpful AI alignment - AI conformance to the intended goal A.I. Rising - 2018 movie directed by Lazar Bodroža Artificial intelligence Automated artificial intelligence - Process of automating the application of maker learning BRAIN Initiative - Collaborative public-private research study effort revealed by the Obama administration China Brain Project Future of Humanity Institute - Defunct Oxford interdisciplinary research study centre General game playing - Ability of artificial intelligence to play various games Generative artificial intelligence - AI system efficient in generating material in action to triggers Human Brain Project - Scientific research job Intelligence amplification - Use of infotech to enhance human intelligence (IA). Machine ethics - Moral behaviours of man-made makers. Moravec's paradox. Multi-task knowing - Solving several maker discovering tasks at the same time. Neural scaling law - Statistical law in artificial intelligence. Outline of expert system - Overview of and topical guide to expert system. Transhumanism - Philosophical movement. Synthetic intelligence - Alternate term for or kind of expert system. Transfer knowing - Machine learning strategy. Loebner Prize - Annual AI competition. Hardware for synthetic intelligence - Hardware specifically developed and enhanced for synthetic intelligence. Weak expert system - Form of expert system.
Notes

^ a b See listed below for the origin of the term "strong AI", and see the scholastic definition of "strong AI" and weak AI in the post Chinese space. ^ AI founder John McCarthy composes: "we can not yet identify in general what kinds of computational treatments we wish to call intelligent. " [26] (For a discussion of some meanings of intelligence utilized by expert system scientists, see philosophy of expert system.). ^ The Lighthill report specifically slammed AI's "grand objectives" and led the taking apart of AI research in England. [55] In the U.S., DARPA ended up being figured out to fund only "mission-oriented direct research study, instead of basic undirected research". [56] [57] ^ As AI creator John McCarthy writes "it would be an excellent relief to the rest of the employees in AI if the inventors of brand-new basic formalisms would express their hopes in a more secured type than has often been the case." [61] ^ In "Mind Children" [122] 1015 cps is utilized. More just recently, in 1997, [123] Moravec argued for 108 MIPS which would roughly represent 1014 cps. Moravec talks in regards to MIPS, not "cps", which is a non-standard term Kurzweil presented. ^ As defined in a standard AI textbook: "The assertion that machines might possibly act wisely (or, maybe much better, act as if they were smart) is called the 'weak AI' hypothesis by theorists, and the assertion that makers that do so are really believing (rather than mimicing thinking) is called the 'strong AI' hypothesis." [121] ^ Alan Turing made this point in 1950. [36] References

^ Krishna, Sri (9 February 2023). "What is artificial narrow intelligence (ANI)?". VentureBeat. Retrieved 1 March 2024. ANI is designed to carry out a single task. ^ "OpenAI Charter". OpenAI. Retrieved 6 April 2023. Our objective is to ensure that synthetic basic intelligence benefits all of humankind. ^ Heath, Alex (18 January 2024). "Mark Zuckerberg's brand-new goal is producing artificial basic intelligence". The Verge. Retrieved 13 June 2024. Our vision is to develop AI that is much better than human-level at all of the human senses. ^ Baum, Seth D. (2020 ). A Study of Artificial General Intelligence Projects for Ethics, Risk, and Policy (PDF) (Report). Global Catastrophic Risk Institute. Retrieved 28 November 2024. 72 AGI R&D tasks were determined as being active in 2020. ^ a b c "AI timelines: What do specialists in artificial intelligence expect for the future?". Our World in Data. Retrieved 6 April 2023. ^ Metz, Cade (15 May 2023). "Some Researchers Say A.I. Is Already Here, Stirring Debate in Tech Circles". The New York Times. Retrieved 18 May 2023. ^ "AI pioneer Geoffrey Hinton stops Google and warns of danger ahead". The New York Times. 1 May 2023. Retrieved 2 May 2023. It is tough to see how you can avoid the bad stars from using it for bad things. ^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric (2023 ). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early try outs GPT-4". arXiv preprint. arXiv:2303.12712. GPT-4 shows sparks of AGI. ^ Butler, Octavia E. (1993 ). Parable of the Sower. Grand Central Publishing. ISBN 978-0-4466-7550-5. All that you touch you change. All that you alter modifications you. ^ Vinge, Vernor (1992 ). A Fire Upon the Deep. Tor Books. ISBN 978-0-8125-1528-2. The Singularity is coming. ^ Morozov, Evgeny (30 June 2023). "The True Threat of Artificial Intelligence". The New York City Times. The real threat is not AI itself but the method we release it. ^ "Impressed by expert system? Experts state AGI is coming next, and it has 'existential' threats". ABC News. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 6 April 2023. AGI might posture existential risks to humanity. ^ Bostrom, Nick (2014 ). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2. The first superintelligence will be the last invention that humankind requires to make. ^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). "A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn". The New York City Times. Mitigating the danger of extinction from AI need to be a worldwide top priority. ^ "Statement on AI Risk". Center for AI Safety. Retrieved 1 March 2024. AI specialists warn of threat of termination from AI. ^ Mitchell, Melanie (30 May 2023). "Are AI's Doomsday Scenarios Worth Taking Seriously?". The New York Times. We are far from developing makers that can outthink us in general methods. ^ LeCun, Yann (June 2023). "AGI does not present an existential risk". Medium. There is no reason to fear AI as an existential hazard. ^ Kurzweil 2005, p. 260. ^ a b Kurzweil, Ray (5 August 2005), "Long Live AI", Forbes, archived from the original on 14 August 2005: Kurzweil explains strong AI as "machine intelligence with the full series of human intelligence.". ^ "The Age of Artificial Intelligence: George John at TEDxLondonBusinessSchool 2013". Archived from the original on 26 February 2014. Retrieved 22 February 2014. ^ Newell & Simon 1976, This is the term they utilize for "human-level" intelligence in the physical symbol system hypothesis. ^ "The Open University on Strong and Weak AI". Archived from the initial on 25 September 2009. Retrieved 8 October 2007. ^ "What is artificial superintelligence (ASI)?|Definition from TechTarget". Enterprise AI. Retrieved 8 October 2023. ^ "Artificial intelligence is changing our world - it is on everyone to make certain that it goes well". Our World in Data. Retrieved 8 October 2023. ^ Dickson, Ben (16 November 2023). "Here is how far we are to achieving AGI, according to DeepMind". VentureBeat. ^ McCarthy, John (2007a). "Basic Questions". Stanford University. Archived from the original on 26 October 2007. Retrieved 6 December 2007. ^ This list of smart characteristics is based on the topics covered by major AI books, consisting of: Russell & Norvig 2003, Luger & Stubblefield 2004, Poole, Mackworth & Goebel 1998 and Nilsson 1998. ^ Johnson 1987. ^ de Charms, R. (1968 ). Personal causation. New York: Academic Press. ^ a b Pfeifer, R. and Bongard J. C., How the body shapes the method we think: a new view of intelligence (The MIT Press, 2007). ISBN 0-2621-6239-3. ^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reconsidered: The concept of proficiency". Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966. ^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reassessed: The concept of skills". Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966. ^ Muehlhauser, Luke (11 August 2013). "What is AGI?". Machine Intelligence Research Institute. Archived from the initial on 25 April 2014. Retrieved 1 May 2014. ^ "What is Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)?|4 Tests For Ensuring Artificial General Intelligence". Talky Blog. 13 July 2019. Archived from the original on 17 July 2019. Retrieved 17 July 2019. ^ Kirk-Giannini, Cameron Domenico; Goldstein, Simon (16 October 2023). "AI is closer than ever to passing the Turing test for 'intelligence'. What happens when it does?". The Conversation. Retrieved 22 September 2024. ^ a b Turing 1950. ^ Turing, Alan (1952 ). B. Jack Copeland (ed.). Can Automatic Calculating Machines Be Said To Think?. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 487-506. ISBN 978-0-1982-5079-1. ^ "Eugene Goostman is a genuine young boy - the Turing Test states so". The Guardian. 9 June 2014. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 3 March 2024. ^ "Scientists contest whether computer 'Eugene Goostman' passed Turing test". BBC News. 9 June 2014. Retrieved 3 March 2024. ^ Jones, Cameron R.; Bergen, Benjamin K. (9 May 2024). "People can not distinguish GPT-4 from a human in a Turing test". arXiv:2405.08007 [cs.HC] ^ Varanasi, Lakshmi (21 March 2023). "AI designs like ChatGPT and GPT-4 are acing whatever from the bar test to AP Biology. Here's a list of tough tests both AI variations have actually passed". Business Insider. Retrieved 30 May 2023. ^ Naysmith, Caleb (7 February 2023). "6 Jobs Artificial Intelligence Is Already Replacing and How Investors Can Take Advantage Of It". Retrieved 30 May 2023. ^ Turk, Victoria (28 January 2015). "The Plan to Replace the Turing Test with a 'Turing Olympics'". Vice. Retrieved 3 March 2024. ^ Gopani, Avi (25 May 2022). "Turing Test is unreliable. The Winograd Schema is obsolete. Coffee is the response". Analytics India Magazine. Retrieved 3 March 2024. ^ Bhaimiya, Sawdah (20 June 2023). "DeepMind's co-founder suggested testing an AI chatbot's ability to turn $100,000 into $1 million to measure human-like intelligence". Business Insider. Retrieved 3 March 2024. ^ Suleyman, Mustafa (14 July 2023). "Mustafa Suleyman: My new Turing test would see if AI can make $1 million". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 3 March 2024. ^ Shapiro, Stuart C. (1992 ). "Artificial Intelligence" (PDF). In Stuart C. Shapiro (ed.). Encyclopedia of Expert System (Second ed.). New York: John Wiley. pp. 54-57. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 1 February 2016. (Section 4 is on "AI-Complete Tasks".). ^ Yampolskiy, Roman V. (2012 ). Xin-She Yang (ed.). "Turing Test as a Specifying Feature of AI-Completeness" (PDF). Expert System, Evolutionary Computation and Metaheuristics (AIECM): 3-17. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 22 May 2013. ^ "AI Index: State of AI in 13 Charts". Stanford University Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence. 15 April 2024. Retrieved 27 May 2024. ^ Crevier 1993, pp. 48-50. ^ Kaplan, Andreas (2022 ). "Artificial Intelligence, Business and Civilization - Our Fate Made in Machines". Archived from the original on 6 May 2022. Retrieved 12 March 2022. ^ Simon 1965, p. 96 priced estimate in Crevier 1993, p. 109. ^ "Scientist on the Set: An Interview with Marvin Minsky". Archived from the original on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 5 April 2008. ^ Marvin Minsky to Darrach (1970 ), priced estimate in Crevier (1993, p. 109). ^ Lighthill 1973; Howe 1994. ^ a b NRC 1999, "Shift to Applied Research Increases Investment". ^ Crevier 1993, pp. 115-117; Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 21-22. ^ Crevier 1993, p. 211, Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 24 and see also Feigenbaum & McCorduck 1983. ^ Crevier 1993, pp. 161-162, 197-203, 240; Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 25. ^ Crevier 1993, pp. 209-212. ^ McCarthy, John (2000 ). "Reply to Lighthill". Stanford University. Archived from the original on 30 September 2008. Retrieved 29 September 2007. ^ Markoff, John (14 October 2005). "Behind Expert system, a Squadron of Bright Real People". The New York Times. Archived from the initial on 2 February 2023. Retrieved 18 February 2017. At its low point, some computer system scientists and software engineers avoided the term expert system for fear of being seen as wild-eyed dreamers. ^ Russell & Norvig 2003, pp. 25-26 ^ "Trends in the Emerging Tech Hype Cycle". Gartner Reports. Archived from the original on 22 May 2019. Retrieved 7 May 2019. ^ a b Moravec 1988, p. 20 ^ Harnad, S. (1990 ). "The Symbol Grounding Problem". Physica D. 42 (1-3): 335-346. arXiv: cs/9906002. Bibcode:1990 PhyD ... 42..335 H. doi:10.1016/ 0167-2789( 90 )90087-6. S2CID 3204300. ^ Gubrud 1997 ^ Hutter, Marcus (2005 ). Universal Expert System: Sequential Decisions Based on Algorithmic Probability. Texts in Theoretical Computer Technology an EATCS Series. Springer. doi:10.1007/ b138233. ISBN 978-3-5402-6877-2. S2CID 33352850. Archived from the initial on 19 July 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2022. ^ Legg, Shane (2008 ). Machine Super Intelligence (PDF) (Thesis). University of Lugano. Archived (PDF) from the initial on 15 June 2022. Retrieved 19 July 2022. ^ Goertzel, Ben (2014 ). Artificial General Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 8598. Journal of Artificial General Intelligence. doi:10.1007/ 978-3-319-09274-4. ISBN 978-3-3190-9273-7. S2CID 8387410. ^ "Who coined the term "AGI"?". goertzel.org. Archived from the initial on 28 December 2018. Retrieved 28 December 2018., via Life 3.0: 'The term "AGI" was promoted by ... Shane Legg, Mark Gubrud and Ben Goertzel' ^ Wang & Goertzel 2007 ^ "First International Summer School in Artificial General Intelligence, Main summer school: June 22 - July 3, 2009, OpenCog Lab: July 6-9, 2009". Archived from the initial on 28 September 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020. ^ "Избираеми дисциплини 2009/2010 - пролетен триместър" [Elective courses 2009/2010 - spring trimester] Факултет по математика и информатика [Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics] (in Bulgarian). Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020. ^ "Избираеми дисциплини 2010/2011 - зимен триместър" [Elective courses 2010/2011 - winter season trimester] Факултет по математика и информатика [Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics] (in Bulgarian). Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020. ^ Shevlin, Henry; Vold, Karina; Crosby, Matthew; Halina, Marta (4 October 2019). "The limitations of device intelligence: Despite development in machine intelligence, artificial general intelligence is still a significant difficulty". EMBO Reports. 20 (10 ): e49177. doi:10.15252/ embr.201949177. ISSN 1469-221X. PMC 6776890. PMID 31531926. ^ Bubeck, Sébastien; Chandrasekaran, Varun; Eldan, Ronen; Gehrke, Johannes; Horvitz, Eric; Kamar, Ece; Lee, Peter; Lee, Yin Tat; Li, Yuanzhi; Lundberg, Scott; Nori, Harsha; Palangi, Hamid; Ribeiro, Marco Tulio; Zhang, Yi (27 March 2023). "Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early try outs GPT-4". arXiv:2303.12712 [cs.CL] ^ "Microsoft Researchers Claim GPT-4 Is Showing "Sparks" of AGI". Futurism. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 13 December 2023. ^ Allen, Paul; Greaves, Mark (12 October 2011). "The Singularity Isn't Near". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 17 September 2014. ^ Winfield, Alan. "Artificial intelligence will not develop into a Frankenstein's monster". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 17 September 2014. Retrieved 17 September 2014. ^ Deane, George (2022 ). "Machines That Feel and Think: The Role of Affective Feelings and Mental Action in (Artificial) General Intelligence". Artificial Life. 28 (3 ): 289-309. doi:10.1162/ artl_a_00368. ISSN 1064-5462. PMID 35881678. S2CID 251069071. ^ a b c Clocksin 2003. ^ Fjelland, Ragnar (17 June 2020). "Why general synthetic intelligence will not be realized". Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 7 (1 ): 1-9. doi:10.1057/ s41599-020-0494-4. hdl:11250/ 2726984. ISSN 2662-9992. S2CID 219710554. ^ McCarthy 2007b. ^ Khatchadourian, Raffi (23 November 2015). "The Doomsday Invention: Will artificial intelligence bring us paradise or destruction?". The New Yorker. Archived from the original on 28 January 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016. ^ Müller, V. C., & Bostrom, N. (2016 ). Future development in expert system: A survey of professional opinion. In Fundamental issues of synthetic intelligence (pp. 555-572). Springer, Cham. ^ Armstrong, Stuart, and Kaj Sotala. 2012. "How We're Predicting AI-or Failing To." In Beyond AI: Artificial Dreams, edited by Jan Romportl, Pavel Ircing, Eva Žáčková, Michal Polák and Radek Schuster, 52-75. Plzeň: University of West Bohemia ^ "Microsoft Now Claims GPT-4 Shows 'Sparks' of General Intelligence". 24 March 2023. ^ Shimek, Cary (6 July 2023). "AI Outperforms Humans in Creativity Test". Neuroscience News. Retrieved 20 October 2023. ^ Guzik, Erik E.; Byrge, Christian; Gilde, Christian (1 December 2023). "The creativity of devices: AI takes the Torrance Test". Journal of Creativity. 33 (3 ): 100065. doi:10.1016/ j.yjoc.2023.100065. ISSN 2713-3745. S2CID 261087185. ^ Arcas, Blaise Agüera y (10 October 2023). "Artificial General Intelligence Is Already Here". Noema. ^ Zia, Tehseen (8 January 2024). "Unveiling of Large Multimodal Models: Shaping the Landscape of Language Models in 2024". Unite.ai. Retrieved 26 May 2024. ^ "Introducing OpenAI o1-preview". OpenAI. 12 September 2024. ^ Knight, Will. "OpenAI Announces a Brand-new AI Model, Code-Named Strawberry, That Solves Difficult Problems Step by Step". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 17 September 2024. ^ "OpenAI Employee Claims AGI Has Been Achieved". Orbital Today. 13 December 2024. Retrieved 27 December 2024. ^ "AI Index: State of AI in 13 Charts". hai.stanford.edu. 15 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024. ^ "Next-Gen AI: OpenAI and Meta's Leap Towards Reasoning Machines". Unite.ai. 19 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024. ^ James, Alex P. (2022 ). "The Why, What, and How of Artificial General Intelligence Chip Development". IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems. 14 (2 ): 333-347. arXiv:2012.06338. doi:10.1109/ TCDS.2021.3069871. ISSN 2379-8920. S2CID 228376556. Archived from the original on 28 August 2022. Retrieved 28 August 2022. ^ Pei, Jing; Deng, Lei; Song, Sen; Zhao, Mingguo; Zhang, Youhui; Wu, Shuang; Wang, Guanrui; Zou, Zhe; Wu, Zhenzhi; He, Wei; Chen, Feng; Deng, Ning; Wu, Si; Wang, Yu; Wu, Yujie (2019 ). "Towards synthetic basic intelligence with hybrid Tianjic chip architecture". Nature. 572 (7767 ): 106-111. Bibcode:2019 Natur.572..106 P. doi:10.1038/ s41586-019-1424-8. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 31367028. S2CID 199056116. Archived from the initial on 29 August 2022. Retrieved 29 August 2022. ^ Pandey, Mohit; Fernandez, Michael; Gentile, Francesco; Isayev, Olexandr; Tropsha, Alexander; Stern, Abraham C.; Cherkasov, Artem (March 2022). "The transformational function of GPU computing and deep learning in drug discovery". Nature Machine Intelligence. 4 (3 ): 211-221. doi:10.1038/ s42256-022-00463-x. ISSN 2522-5839. S2CID 252081559. ^ Goertzel & Pennachin 2006. ^ a b c (Kurzweil 2005, p. 260). ^ a b c Goertzel 2007. ^ Grace, Katja (2016 ). "Error in Armstrong and Sotala 2012". AI Impacts (blog site). Archived from the original on 4 December 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020. ^ a b Butz, Martin V. (1 March 2021). "Towards Strong AI". KI - Künstliche Intelligenz. 35 (1 ): 91-101. doi:10.1007/ s13218-021-00705-x. ISSN 1610-1987. S2CID 256065190. ^ Liu, Feng; Shi, Yong; Liu, Ying (2017 ). "Intelligence Quotient and Intelligence Grade of Artificial Intelligence". Annals of Data Science. 4 (2 ): 179-191. arXiv:1709.10242. doi:10.1007/ s40745-017-0109-0. S2CID 37900130. ^ Brien, Jörn (5 October 2017). "Google-KI doppelt so schlau wie Siri" [Google AI is two times as clever as Siri - however a six-year-old beats both] (in German). Archived from the original on 3 January 2019. Retrieved 2 January 2019. ^ Grossman, Gary