Definition of AGI keeps changing to exclude the latest model
Summary
A discussion on how the definition of AGI is being revised over time, often to exclude the capabilities of the latest AI models.
Similar Articles
Doesn't matter what your definition of it is, if you believe what we have now is AGI, your definition is the most lenient and weakest concept of "agi" there is
Argues that current AI does not meet AGI standards because it lacks recursive self-improvement, and criticizes those who claim otherwise as having a weak definition of AGI.
AI labs are claiming “AGI” is imminent—but does that mean what we think it means?
The article questions the meaning of AGI as claimed by AI labs, noting how the term has evolved and including expert opinions on its definition and implications.
@charliejhills: Researchers just dropped a paper redefining what AGI actually is. And it's not what most people think. The paper opens …
A new paper redefines AGI as adaptability under constraints (compute, memory, energy) and proposes an 'artificial scientist benchmark' focusing on autonomous discovery of cause and effect, rather than human-level performance on fixed tasks.
We already got AGI a while ago, you didn't notice because goal-post shifting has been so subtle.
The article argues that AGI has already been achieved based on historical definitions, as LLMs outperform most humans in intelligence, and suggests that ASI is the next frontier.
How far are we from this definition of AGI? What year do you predict?
The article proposes a definition of AGI focused on advanced intellectual abilities for scientific discovery and asks for predictions on when it will be achieved.