TL;DR
This paper argues that artificial general intelligence (AGI) and human-level AI are not equivalent, emphasizing that humans are not true general intelligences, which challenges common assumptions in AI research.
Contribution
The paper clarifies the distinction between AGI and human intelligence, providing a logical proof that humans do not possess true general intelligence.
Findings
Humans are not genuine general intelligences.
The common assumption of equivalence between AGI and HLAI is unjustified.
The paper offers a logical proof distinguishing AGI from human intelligence.
Abstract
Terms Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Human-Level Artificial Intelligence (HLAI) have been used interchangeably to refer to the Holy Grail of Artificial Intelligence (AI) research, creation of a machine capable of achieving goals in a wide range of environments. However, widespread implicit assumption of equivalence between capabilities of AGI and HLAI appears to be unjustified, as humans are not general intelligences. In this paper, we will prove this distinction.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsComputability, Logic, AI Algorithms