Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is a kind of expert system (AI) that matches or exceeds human cognitive capabilities throughout a vast array of cognitive jobs. This contrasts with narrow AI, which is limited to specific jobs. [1] Artificial superintelligence (ASI), on the other hand, refers to AGI that considerably surpasses human cognitive capabilities. AGI is thought about one of 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 identified 72 active AGI research study and advancement tasks throughout 37 countries. [4]

The timeline for attaining AGI stays a topic of ongoing debate amongst scientists and professionals. Since 2023, some argue that it might be possible in years or decades; others keep it might take a century or longer; a minority think it might never be attained; and another minority declares that it is already here. [5] [6] Notable AI researcher Geoffrey Hinton has expressed concerns about the rapid development towards AGI, suggesting it could be achieved sooner than many anticipate. [7]

There is dispute on the specific meaning of AGI and relating to whether modern big language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 are early types of AGI. [8] AGI is a typical topic in science fiction and futures research studies. [9] [10]

Contention exists over whether AGI represents an existential threat. [11] [12] [13] Many experts on AI have stated that mitigating the danger of human extinction postured by AGI needs to be an international top priority. [14] [15] Others discover the advancement of AGI to be too remote to provide such a threat. [16] [17]

Terminology

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

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

Related principles consist of synthetic superintelligence and transformative AI. An artificial superintelligence (ASI) is a theoretical kind of AGI that is a lot more normally smart than humans, [23] while the concept of transformative AI associates with AI having a big effect on society, for example, similar to the agricultural or industrial revolution. [24]

A structure for classifying AGI in levels was proposed in 2023 by Google DeepMind researchers. They specify 5 levels of AGI: emerging, qualified, professional, virtuoso, and superhuman. For instance, a proficient AGI is defined as an AI that exceeds 50% of skilled grownups in a vast array of non-physical tasks, and a superhuman AGI (i.e. a synthetic superintelligence) is likewise defined however with a threshold of 100%. They think about large language models like ChatGPT or LLaMA 2 to be circumstances of emerging AGI. [25]

Characteristics

Various popular meanings of intelligence have been proposed. Among the leading proposals is the Turing test. However, there are other popular meanings, and some scientists disagree with the more popular approaches. [b]

Intelligence traits

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

factor, usage strategy, fix puzzles, and make judgments under uncertainty
represent knowledge, including good sense understanding
strategy
find out
- interact in natural language
- if required, integrate these skills in conclusion of any provided goal


Many interdisciplinary methods (e.g. cognitive science, computational intelligence, and decision making) consider additional qualities such as imagination (the ability to form novel psychological images and concepts) [28] and autonomy. [29]

Computer-based systems that exhibit many of these abilities exist (e.g. see computational creativity, automated thinking, choice support group, robotic, evolutionary computation, intelligent representative). There is argument about whether contemporary AI systems possess them to a sufficient degree.

Physical traits

Other abilities are considered desirable in smart systems, as they may affect intelligence or help in its expression. These consist of: [30]

- the ability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc), and
- the capability to act (e.g. relocation and control objects, modification location to check out, and so on).


This includes the capability to spot and respond to danger. [31]

Although the ability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc) and the ability to act (e.g. move and control items, modification place to check out, and so on) can be preferable for some smart systems, [30] these physical abilities are not strictly required for an entity to qualify as AGI-particularly under the thesis that big language designs (LLMs) may currently be or end up being AGI. Even from a less optimistic point of view on LLMs, there is no firm requirement for an AGI to have a human-like form; being a silicon-based computational system is sufficient, supplied it can process input (language) from the external world in location of human senses. This interpretation lines up with the understanding that AGI has actually never ever been proscribed a specific physical embodiment and thus does not demand a capability for mobility or traditional "eyes and ears". [32]

Tests for human-level AGI

Several tests meant to verify human-level AGI have been thought about, including: [33] [34]

The concept of the test is that the maker has to try and pretend to be a man, by responding to questions put to it, and setiathome.berkeley.edu it will only pass if the pretence is reasonably persuading. A considerable part of a jury, who need to not be skilled about makers, should be taken in by the pretence. [37]

AI-complete problems

An issue is informally called "AI-complete" or "AI-hard" if it is believed that in order to resolve it, one would require to implement AGI, because the solution is beyond the capabilities of a purpose-specific algorithm. [47]

There are numerous problems that have actually been conjectured to require general intelligence to fix along with human beings. Examples include computer system vision, natural language understanding, and dealing with unforeseen circumstances while resolving any real-world issue. [48] Even a particular job like translation needs a device to read and write in both languages, follow the author's argument (factor), understand the context (knowledge), and consistently replicate the author's original intent (social intelligence). All of these problems need to be resolved concurrently in order to reach human-level maker performance.

However, many of these tasks can now be carried out by contemporary big language designs. According to Stanford University's 2024 AI index, AI has actually reached human-level efficiency on lots of criteria for reading understanding and visual thinking. [49]

History

Classical AI

Modern AI research study began in the mid-1950s. [50] The first generation of AI scientists were convinced that artificial basic intelligence was possible which it would exist in simply a few decades. [51] AI leader Herbert A. Simon wrote in 1965: "makers will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a male can do." [52]

Their predictions were the inspiration for Stanley Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke's character HAL 9000, who embodied what AI researchers believed they could produce by the year 2001. AI pioneer Marvin Minsky was a consultant [53] on the task of making HAL 9000 as sensible as possible according to the agreement forecasts of the time. He stated in 1967, "Within a generation ... the issue of creating 'expert system' will substantially be fixed". [54]

Several classical AI jobs, such as Doug Lenat's Cyc task (that began in 1984), and Allen Newell's Soar task, were directed at AGI.

However, in the early 1970s, it became apparent that scientists had actually grossly ignored the difficulty of the task. Funding agencies ended up being hesitant of AGI and put scientists under increasing pressure to produce helpful "used AI". [c] In the early 1980s, Japan's Fifth Generation Computer Project restored interest in AGI, setting out a ten-year timeline that included AGI objectives like "continue a casual discussion". [58] In reaction to this and the success of specialist systems, both market and federal government pumped money 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 researchers who anticipated the imminent achievement of AGI had actually been mistaken. By the 1990s, AI researchers had a reputation for making vain promises. They ended up being hesitant to make predictions at all [d] and avoided reference of "human level" expert system for worry of being identified "wild-eyed dreamer [s]. [62]

Narrow AI research study

In the 1990s and early 21st century, mainstream AI attained business success and academic respectability by focusing on specific sub-problems where AI can produce verifiable outcomes and commercial applications, such as speech recognition and recommendation algorithms. [63] These "applied AI" systems are now used extensively throughout the technology market, and research study in this vein is greatly funded in both academic community and market. As of 2018 [update], development in this field was thought about an emerging trend, and a fully grown stage was expected to be reached in more than ten years. [64]

At the turn of the century, numerous mainstream AI scientists [65] hoped that strong AI might be developed by integrating programs that solve different sub-problems. Hans Moravec wrote in 1988:

I am positive that this bottom-up path to expert system will one day satisfy the standard top-down route majority way, prepared to provide the real-world skills and the commonsense understanding that has been so frustratingly elusive 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 disputed. For example, Stevan Harnad of Princeton University concluded his 1990 paper on the symbol grounding hypothesis by mentioning:

The expectation has actually typically been voiced that "top-down" (symbolic) approaches to modeling cognition will somehow meet "bottom-up" (sensory) approaches somewhere in between. If the grounding factors to consider in this paper are legitimate, then this expectation is hopelessly modular and there is truly just one feasible route from sense to symbols: from the ground up. A free-floating symbolic level like the software application level of a computer system will never ever be reached by this path (or vice versa) - nor is it clear why we need to even try to reach such a level, given that it appears getting there would just total up to uprooting our symbols from their intrinsic meanings (thus merely lowering ourselves to the practical equivalent of a programmable computer). [66]

Modern synthetic basic intelligence research study

The term "artificial general intelligence" was utilized as early as 1997, by Mark Gubrud [67] in a conversation of the implications of fully automated military production and operations. A mathematical formalism of AGI was proposed by Marcus Hutter in 2000. Named AIXI, the proposed AGI representative maximises "the capability to satisfy objectives in a wide variety of environments". [68] This kind of AGI, characterized by the capability to increase a mathematical definition of intelligence instead of display human-like behaviour, [69] was also called universal synthetic intelligence. [70]

The term AGI was re-introduced and promoted by Shane Legg and Ben Goertzel around 2002. [71] AGI research study activity in 2006 was described by Pei Wang and Ben Goertzel [72] as "producing publications and preliminary 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 very 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 number of guest speakers.

As of 2023 [upgrade], a small number of computer system scientists are active in AGI research study, and numerous contribute to a series of AGI conferences. However, progressively more scientists have an interest in open-ended knowing, [76] [77] which is the concept of allowing AI to constantly learn and innovate like humans do.

Feasibility

Since 2023, the development and potential achievement of AGI remains a subject of extreme debate within the AI community. While traditional agreement held that AGI was a distant objective, recent developments have led some researchers and market figures to declare that early forms of AGI might already exist. [78] AI pioneer Herbert A. Simon speculated in 1965 that "devices will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a male can do". This prediction failed to come real. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen believed that such intelligence is unlikely in the 21st century since it would need "unforeseeable and basically unpredictable breakthroughs" 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 synthetic intelligence is as large as the gulf in between present space flight and practical faster-than-light spaceflight. [80]

An additional difficulty is the absence of clarity in defining what intelligence involves. Does it require consciousness? Must it display the capability to set goals in addition to pursue them? Is it purely a matter of scale such that if design sizes increase sufficiently, intelligence will emerge? Are centers such as planning, thinking, and causal understanding required? Does intelligence need explicitly reproducing the brain and its specific faculties? Does it require feelings? [81]

Most AI scientists think strong AI can be attained in the future, but some thinkers, like Hubert Dreyfus and Roger Penrose, reject the possibility of achieving strong AI. [82] [83] John McCarthy is among those who think human-level AI will be achieved, but that today level of development is such that a date can not properly be forecasted. [84] AI experts' views on the expediency of AGI wax and wane. Four polls conducted in 2012 and 2013 suggested that the average price quote among specialists for when they would be 50% confident AGI would get here was 2040 to 2050, depending on the poll, with the mean being 2081. Of the experts, 16.5% responded to with "never" when asked the exact same concern but with a 90% confidence instead. [85] [86] Further present AGI development considerations can be discovered 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 time frame there is a strong bias towards forecasting the arrival of human-level AI as in between 15 and 25 years from the time the prediction was made". They evaluated 95 predictions made between 1950 and 2012 on when human-level AI will happen. [87]

In 2023, Microsoft researchers released a comprehensive assessment of GPT-4. They concluded: "Given the breadth and depth of GPT-4's capabilities, we think that it might fairly be considered as an early (yet still insufficient) version of an artificial general intelligence (AGI) system." [88] Another study in 2023 reported that GPT-4 surpasses 99% of human beings on the Torrance tests of creativity. [89] [90]

Blaise Agüera y Arcas and Peter Norvig composed in 2023 that a substantial level of basic intelligence has currently been achieved with frontier models. They composed that hesitation to this view comes from four primary reasons: a "healthy apprehension about metrics for AGI", an "ideological dedication to alternative AI theories or methods", a "dedication to human (or biological) exceptionalism", or a "issue about the economic ramifications of AGI". [91]

2023 also marked the development of big multimodal models (big language models efficient in processing or creating numerous methods such as text, audio, and images). [92]

In 2024, OpenAI launched o1-preview, the first of a series of models that "spend more time thinking before they respond". According to Mira Murati, this capability to think before responding represents a brand-new, additional paradigm. It enhances design outputs by spending more computing power when producing the response, whereas the model scaling paradigm improves outputs by increasing the design size, training data and training compute power. [93] [94]

An OpenAI employee, Vahid Kazemi, declared in 2024 that the company had actually achieved AGI, mentioning, "In my viewpoint, we have already attained AGI and it's much more clear with O1." Kazemi clarified that while the AI is not yet "much better than any human at any task", it is "much better than a lot of humans at many jobs." He also dealt with criticisms that big language designs (LLMs) simply follow predefined patterns, comparing their knowing process to the clinical approach of observing, hypothesizing, and confirming. These declarations have actually sparked debate, as they count on a broad and unconventional meaning of AGI-traditionally understood as AI that matches human intelligence throughout all domains. Critics argue that, while OpenAI's models demonstrate amazing flexibility, they might not fully satisfy this standard. Notably, Kazemi's comments came quickly after OpenAI removed "AGI" from the terms of its collaboration with Microsoft, prompting speculation about the business's tactical intentions. [95]

Timescales

Progress in artificial intelligence has traditionally gone through durations of rapid development separated by periods when development appeared to stop. [82] Ending each hiatus were fundamental advances in hardware, software application or both to produce space for more development. [82] [98] [99] For instance, the hardware available in the twentieth century was not enough to carry out deep knowing, which requires great deals of GPU-enabled CPUs. [100]

In the intro to his 2006 book, [101] Goertzel says that estimates of the time needed before a really flexible AGI is built vary from ten years to over a century. As of 2007 [update], the consensus in the AGI research study community appeared to be that the timeline gone over by Ray Kurzweil in 2005 in The Singularity is Near [102] (i.e. in between 2015 and 2045) was possible. [103] Mainstream AI researchers have actually offered a wide variety of viewpoints on whether progress will be this quick. A 2012 meta-analysis of 95 such viewpoints discovered a predisposition towards predicting that the start of AGI would occur within 16-26 years for modern and historic predictions alike. That paper has been criticized for how it classified opinions as expert or non-expert. [104]

In 2012, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton established a neural network called AlexNet, which won the ImageNet competition with a top-5 test error rate of 15.3%, considerably much better than the second-best entry's rate of 26.3% (the standard method utilized a weighted sum of scores from different pre-defined classifiers). [105] AlexNet was considered as the preliminary ground-breaker of the present deep knowing wave. [105]

In 2017, researchers Feng Liu, Yong Shi, and Ying Liu conducted intelligence tests on publicly available and freely accessible weak AI such as Google AI, Apple's Siri, and others. At the optimum, these AIs reached an IQ worth of about 47, which corresponds roughly to a six-year-old kid in first grade. A grownup comes to about 100 on average. Similar tests were brought out in 2014, with the IQ score reaching an optimum worth of 27. [106] [107]

In 2020, OpenAI established GPT-3, a language design capable of performing many diverse jobs without particular training. According to Gary Grossman in a VentureBeat article, while there is agreement 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 very same year, Jason Rohrer used his GPT-3 account to develop a chatbot, and provided a chatbot-developing platform called "Project December". OpenAI requested for modifications to the chatbot to abide by their safety guidelines; Rohrer detached Project December from the GPT-3 API. [109]

In 2022, DeepMind established Gato, a "general-purpose" system capable of performing more than 600 different jobs. [110]

In 2023, Microsoft Research published a research study on an early variation of OpenAI's GPT-4, contending that it showed more basic intelligence than previous AI designs and showed human-level performance in tasks spanning several domains, such as mathematics, coding, and law. This research sparked a dispute on whether GPT-4 could be thought about an early, incomplete variation of artificial general intelligence, emphasizing the requirement for additional expedition and evaluation of such systems. [111]

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

The idea that this stuff could actually get smarter than individuals - a couple of individuals thought that, [...] But a lot of individuals thought it was method off. And I thought it was way off. I thought it was 30 to 50 years and even longer away. Obviously, I no longer believe that.

In May 2023, Demis Hassabis similarly said that "The development in the last few years has actually been pretty extraordinary", which he sees no reason it would slow down, anticipating AGI within a decade or even a few years. [113] In March 2024, Nvidia's CEO, Jensen Huang, stated his expectation that within five years, AI would be capable of passing any test a minimum of as well as human beings. [114] In June 2024, the AI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner, a previous OpenAI worker, approximated AGI by 2027 to be "strikingly possible". [115]

Whole brain emulation

While the development of transformer models like in ChatGPT is thought about the most appealing course to AGI, [116] [117] entire brain emulation can act as an alternative method. With whole brain simulation, a brain design is built by scanning and mapping a biological brain in information, and then copying and mimicing it on a computer system or another computational device. The simulation model must be adequately loyal to the original, so that it acts in almost the same way as the initial brain. [118] Whole brain emulation is a type of brain simulation that is discussed in computational neuroscience and neuroinformatics, and for medical research purposes. It has actually been gone over in synthetic intelligence research [103] as a method to strong AI. Neuroimaging technologies that might provide the necessary detailed understanding are improving rapidly, and futurist Ray Kurzweil in the book The Singularity Is Near [102] anticipates that a map of enough quality will become available on a similar timescale to the computing power needed to imitate it.

Early estimates

For low-level brain simulation, a really powerful cluster of computers or GPUs would be required, provided the massive quantity of synapses within the human brain. Each of the 1011 (one hundred billion) nerve cells has on average 7,000 synaptic connections (synapses) to other nerve cells. The brain of a three-year-old child has about 1015 synapses (1 quadrillion). This number declines with age, stabilizing by adulthood. Estimates differ for an adult, varying from 1014 to 5 × 1014 synapses (100 to 500 trillion). [120] An estimate of the brain's processing power, based on an easy switch design for neuron activity, is around 1014 (100 trillion) synaptic updates per second (SUPS). [121]

In 1997, Kurzweil looked at various quotes for the hardware needed to equal the human brain and embraced a figure of 1016 computations per second (cps). [e] (For contrast, if a "computation" was equivalent to one "floating-point operation" - a procedure used to rate existing supercomputers - then 1016 "calculations" would be equivalent to 10 petaFLOPS, achieved in 2011, while 1018 was achieved in 2022.) He used this figure to anticipate the required hardware would be offered sometime between 2015 and 2025, if the exponential growth in computer power at the time of composing continued.

Current research

The Human Brain Project, an EU-funded effort active from 2013 to 2023, has actually developed an especially comprehensive and publicly accessible atlas of the human brain. [124] In 2023, scientists from Duke University performed a high-resolution scan of a mouse brain.

Criticisms of simulation-based techniques

The artificial neuron model presumed by Kurzweil and utilized in numerous existing artificial neural network applications is simple compared with biological nerve cells. A brain simulation would likely have to record the comprehensive cellular behaviour of biological neurons, currently understood only in broad overview. The overhead presented by full modeling of the biological, chemical, and physical information of neural behaviour (especially on a molecular scale) would need computational powers a number of orders of magnitude bigger than Kurzweil's quote. In addition, the price quotes do not account for glial cells, which are known to play a role in cognitive procedures. [125]

An essential criticism of the simulated brain method stems from embodied cognition theory which asserts that human personification is a vital element of human intelligence and is required to ground significance. [126] [127] If this theory is proper, any totally functional brain model will require to include 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 point of view

"Strong AI" as defined in viewpoint

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

Strong AI hypothesis: An expert system system can have "a mind" and "consciousness".
Weak AI hypothesis: An expert system system can (just) imitate it believes and has a mind and consciousness.


The first one he called "strong" due to the fact that it makes a more powerful statement: it presumes something unique has taken place to the device that goes beyond those abilities that we can evaluate. The behaviour of a "weak AI" maker would be specifically similar to a "strong AI" maker, but the latter would also have subjective mindful experience. This use is also common in academic AI research and books. [129]

In contrast to Searle and mainstream AI, some futurists such as Ray Kurzweil utilize the term "strong AI" to imply "human level artificial general intelligence". [102] This is not the like Searle's strong AI, unless it is assumed that consciousness is necessary for human-level AGI. Academic theorists such as Searle do not think that is the case, and to most expert system scientists the question is out-of-scope. [130]

Mainstream AI is most interested in how a program behaves. [131] According to Russell and Norvig, "as long as the program works, they do not care if you call it real or scientific-programs.science a simulation." [130] If the program can behave as if it has a mind, then there is no need to know if it in fact has mind - certainly, there would be no method to inform. For AI research study, Searle's "weak AI hypothesis" is comparable to the statement "synthetic basic intelligence is possible". Thus, according to Russell and Norvig, "most AI researchers take the weak AI hypothesis for granted, and do not care about the strong AI hypothesis." [130] Thus, for academic AI research, "Strong AI" and "AGI" are 2 different things.

Consciousness

Consciousness can have different meanings, and some elements play substantial roles in science fiction and the principles of artificial intelligence:

Sentience (or "incredible consciousness"): The capability to "feel" understandings or emotions subjectively, as opposed to the ability to reason about understandings. Some thinkers, such as David Chalmers, use the term "consciousness" to refer solely to sensational awareness, which is approximately comparable to life. [132] Determining why and how subjective experience emerges is called the hard issue of consciousness. [133] Thomas Nagel discussed in 1974 that it "seems like" something to be conscious. If we are not conscious, then it does not 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 unlikely to ask "what does it seem like to be a toaster?" Nagel concludes that a bat seems mindful (i.e., has consciousness) however a toaster does not. [134] In 2022, a Google engineer declared that the company's AI chatbot, LaMDA, had attained sentience, though this claim was widely disputed by other experts. [135]

Self-awareness: To have conscious awareness of oneself as a different individual, especially to be consciously familiar with one's own thoughts. This is opposed to simply being the "subject of one's believed"-an operating system or debugger has the ability to be "aware of itself" (that is, to represent itself in the exact same way it represents whatever else)-but this is not what individuals typically imply when they use the term "self-awareness". [g]

These characteristics have a moral measurement. AI sentience would generate issues of welfare and legal security, similarly to animals. [136] Other elements of awareness associated to cognitive capabilities are also pertinent to the idea of AI rights. [137] Figuring out how to integrate sophisticated AI with existing legal and social structures is an emerging problem. [138]

Benefits

AGI could have a broad variety of applications. If oriented towards such objectives, AGI could assist alleviate various problems worldwide such as appetite, hardship and health issue. [139]

AGI could enhance performance and performance in a lot of jobs. For example, in public health, AGI might accelerate medical research study, significantly versus cancer. [140] It could look after the elderly, [141] and equalize access to fast, high-quality medical diagnostics. It might use enjoyable, cheap and customized education. [141] The requirement to work to subsist could become outdated if the wealth produced is appropriately redistributed. [141] [142] This also raises the concern of the location of humans in a radically automated society.

AGI could likewise assist to make logical choices, and to expect and prevent disasters. It might also assist to profit of potentially devastating innovations such as nanotechnology or climate engineering, while preventing the associated risks. [143] If an AGI's main goal is to avoid existential disasters such as human extinction (which could be difficult if the Vulnerable World Hypothesis ends up being true), [144] it could take steps to considerably minimize the threats [143] while lessening the effect of these measures on our quality of life.

Risks

Existential risks

AGI may represent multiple types of existential danger, which are risks that threaten "the premature extinction of Earth-originating smart life or the long-term and extreme damage of its potential for desirable future advancement". [145] The danger of human termination from AGI has been the topic of lots of disputes, but there is also the possibility that the advancement of AGI would lead to a completely flawed future. Notably, it could be used to spread out and protect the set of worths of whoever establishes it. If humankind still has moral blind areas comparable to slavery in the past, AGI may irreversibly entrench it, preventing moral development. [146] Furthermore, AGI could assist in mass security and indoctrination, which could be used to create a stable repressive worldwide totalitarian regime. [147] [148] There is likewise a risk for the makers themselves. If makers that are sentient or otherwise deserving of ethical factor to consider are mass created in the future, participating in a civilizational path that forever neglects their welfare and interests could be an existential disaster. [149] [150] Considering just how much AGI could improve mankind's future and aid minimize 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 termination

The thesis that AI presents an existential risk for human beings, and that this danger requires more attention, is controversial however has been endorsed in 2023 by lots of public figures, AI scientists and CEOs of AI companies such as Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Demis Hassabis and Sam Altman. [151] [152]

In 2014, Stephen Hawking criticized prevalent indifference:

So, facing possible futures of enormous advantages and dangers, the professionals are surely doing everything possible to ensure the very best result, right? Wrong. If a remarkable alien civilisation sent us a message stating, 'We'll show up in a couple of decades,' would we just respond, 'OK, call us when you get here-we'll leave the lights on?' Probably not-but this is basically what is taking place with AI. [153]

The prospective fate of humanity has actually in some cases been compared to the fate of gorillas threatened by human activities. The comparison specifies that higher intelligence allowed mankind to dominate gorillas, which are now susceptible in ways that they might not have actually anticipated. As an outcome, the gorilla has become an endangered types, not out of malice, however simply as a civilian casualties from human activities. [154]

The skeptic Yann LeCun thinks about that AGIs will have no desire to control humankind and that we should beware not to anthropomorphize them and interpret their intents as we would for human beings. He stated that individuals will not be "clever sufficient to create super-intelligent devices, yet unbelievably silly to the point of providing it moronic goals without any safeguards". [155] On the other side, the principle of instrumental convergence recommends that practically whatever their objectives, intelligent agents will have reasons to try to endure and acquire more power as intermediary steps to accomplishing these objectives. Which this does not require having emotions. [156]

Many scholars who are worried about existential threat supporter for more research study into solving the "control problem" to address the question: what kinds of safeguards, algorithms, or architectures can programmers carry out to increase the probability that their recursively-improving AI would continue to act in a friendly, rather than damaging, manner after it reaches superintelligence? [157] [158] Solving the control problem is complicated by the AI arms race (which could lead to a race to the bottom of safety precautions in order to launch items before rivals), [159] and the usage of AI in weapon systems. [160]

The thesis that AI can posture existential danger also has detractors. Skeptics usually state that AGI is not likely in the short-term, or that concerns about AGI distract from other concerns connected to present AI. [161] Former Google scams czar Shuman Ghosemajumder thinks about that for lots of people beyond the technology industry, existing chatbots and LLMs are already perceived as though they were AGI, causing further misconception and worry. [162]

Skeptics in some cases charge that the thesis is crypto-religious, with an unreasonable belief in the possibility of superintelligence changing an illogical belief in a supreme God. [163] Some scientists think that the communication campaigns on AI existential risk by certain AI groups (such as OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepMind, and Conjecture) might be an at effort at regulatory capture and to inflate interest in their products. [164] [165]

In 2023, the CEOs of Google DeepMind, OpenAI and Anthropic, along with other industry leaders and scientists, provided a joint statement asserting that "Mitigating the threat of extinction from AI ought to be an international priority together with other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war." [152]

Mass unemployment

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

According to Stephen Hawking, the result of automation on the quality of life will depend on how the wealth will be redistributed: [142]

Everyone can delight in a life of glamorous leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can wind up badly poor if the machine-owners effectively lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the pattern seems to be towards the second alternative, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality

Elon Musk considers that the automation of society will need governments to adopt a universal basic income. [168]

See likewise

Artificial brain - Software and hardware with cognitive capabilities comparable to those of the animal or human brain
AI effect
AI safety - Research location on making AI safe and advantageous
AI alignment - AI conformance to the designated objective
A.I. Rising - 2018 movie directed by Lazar Bodroža
Artificial intelligence
Automated artificial intelligence - Process of automating the application of device learning
BRAIN Initiative - Collaborative public-private research effort revealed by the Obama administration
China Brain Project
Future of Humanity Institute - Defunct Oxford interdisciplinary research study centre
General video game playing - Ability of artificial intelligence to play different video games
Generative synthetic intelligence - AI system efficient in generating content in reaction to triggers
Human Brain Project - Scientific research study task
Intelligence amplification - Use of info technology to augment human intelligence (IA).
Machine ethics - Moral behaviours of man-made makers.
Moravec's paradox.
Multi-task knowing - Solving numerous machine finding out tasks at the same time.
Neural scaling law - Statistical law in artificial intelligence.
Outline of artificial intelligence - Overview of and topical guide to artificial intelligence.
Transhumanism - Philosophical motion.
Synthetic intelligence - Alternate term for or kind of synthetic intelligence.
Transfer learning - Artificial intelligence method.
Loebner Prize - Annual AI competitors.
Hardware for expert system - Hardware specially created and optimized for expert system.
Weak expert system - Form of expert system.


Notes

^ a b See below for the origin of the term "strong AI", and see the scholastic meaning of "strong AI" and weak AI in the short article Chinese space.
^ AI creator John McCarthy composes: "we can not yet characterize in general what sort of computational procedures we desire to call smart. " [26] (For a conversation of some meanings of intelligence utilized by expert system researchers, see philosophy of expert system.).
^ The Lighthill report specifically criticized AI's "grandiose objectives" and led the dismantling of AI research study in England. [55] In the U.S., DARPA became determined to fund only "mission-oriented direct research study, instead of fundamental undirected research". [56] [57] ^ As AI creator John McCarthy composes "it would be an excellent relief to the rest of the employees in AI if the developers of brand-new general formalisms would express their hopes in a more guarded form than has often been the case." [61] ^ In "Mind Children" [122] 1015 cps is used. More recently, in 1997, [123] Moravec argued for 108 MIPS which would approximately represent 1014 cps. Moravec talks in terms of MIPS, not "cps", which is a non-standard term Kurzweil presented.
^ As defined in a standard AI textbook: "The assertion that makers could potentially act intelligently (or, perhaps better, act as if they were smart) is called the 'weak AI' hypothesis by theorists, and the assertion that devices that do so are really thinking (instead of imitating 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 created to perform a single task.
^ "OpenAI Charter". OpenAI. Retrieved 6 April 2023. Our objective is to make sure that artificial basic intelligence benefits all of mankind.
^ Heath, Alex (18 January 2024). "Mark Zuckerberg's brand-new objective is creating synthetic basic intelligence". The Verge. Retrieved 13 June 2024. Our vision is to build AI that is 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 projects were determined as being active in 2020.
^ a b c "AI timelines: What do professionals in expert system anticipate 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 City Times. Retrieved 18 May 2023.
^ "AI pioneer Geoffrey Hinton gives up Google and cautions of threat 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 reveals stimulates 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 Expert System". The New York Times. The genuine danger is not AI itself but the method we release it.
^ "Impressed by artificial intelligence? Experts state AGI is coming next, and it has 'existential' risks". ABC News. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 6 April 2023. AGI could pose existential threats to mankind.
^ 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 mankind requires to make.
^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). "A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn". The New York Times. Mitigating the threat of termination from AI ought to be an international priority.
^ "Statement on AI Risk". Center for AI Safety. Retrieved 1 March 2024. AI professionals caution of risk 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 creating machines that can outthink us in basic methods.
^ LeCun, Yann (June 2023). "AGI does not present an existential threat". 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 describes strong AI as "machine intelligence with the complete variety 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 use 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 synthetic superintelligence (ASI)?|Definition from TechTarget". Enterprise AI. Retrieved 8 October 2023.
^ "Artificial intelligence is transforming our world - it is on all of us to make sure that it goes well". Our World in Data. Retrieved 8 October 2023.
^ Dickson, Ben (16 November 2023). "Here is how far we are to attaining AGI, according to DeepMind". VentureBeat.
^ McCarthy, John (2007a). "Basic Questions". Stanford University. Archived from the initial on 26 October 2007. Retrieved 6 December 2007.
^ This list of smart characteristics is based on the subjects covered by significant AI books, including: 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 forms the method we believe: a new view of intelligence (The MIT Press, 2007). ISBN 0-2621-6239-3.
^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reassessed: The idea of skills". Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966.
^ White, R. W. (1959 ). "Motivation reconsidered: The idea of proficiency". 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 original 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 real young boy - the Turing Test states so". The Guardian. 9 June 2014. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 3 March 2024.
^ "Scientists dispute 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 identify GPT-4 from a human in a Turing test". arXiv:2405.08007 [cs.HC]
^ Varanasi, Lakshmi (21 March 2023). "AI models like ChatGPT and GPT-4 are acing everything from the bar examination to AP Biology. Here's a list of tough exams both AI versions have passed". Business Insider. Retrieved 30 May 2023.
^ Naysmith, Caleb (7 February 2023). "6 Jobs Expert System Is Already Replacing and How Investors Can Profit From 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 undependable. 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 determine 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 ). "Expert System" (PDF). In Stuart C. Shapiro (ed.). Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence (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 quoted in Crevier 1993, p. 109.
^ "Scientist on the Set: An Interview with Marvin Minsky". Archived from the initial on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 5 April 2008.
^ Marvin Minsky to Darrach (1970 ), priced quote 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 Artificial Intelligence, a Squadron of Bright Real People". The New York City Times. Archived from the original on 2 February 2023. Retrieved 18 February 2017. At its low point, some computer scientists and software application engineers prevented the term expert system for fear of being considered 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 Artificial Intelligence: Sequential Decisions Based Upon 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 original on 28 December 2018. Retrieved 28 December 2018., through Life 3.0: 'The term "AGI" was popularized 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 original 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 initial 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 initial on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
^ Shevlin, Henry; Vold, Karina; Crosby, Matthew; Halina, Marta (4 October 2019). "The limitations of maker intelligence: Despite development in maker intelligence, artificial general intelligence is still a major 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 explores 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,