What Is AGI-Hard
lspace.swyx.io
What Is AGI-Hard
1–10 of 129 posts
Re: What Is AGI-Hard
#2I like the concept of AGI-hard and the characterization of the common traps of AI productization feels accurate.
One shortcoming of the analogy is that we have methods to prove when a problem is NP-hard. Are there ways to prove a problem is AGI-hard? Can it even be rigorously characterized? Relying on someone asserting it on Twitter feels unsatisfying (e.g. how accurate would experts have been at predicting the current capabilities of AI if you asked them 10 years ago? I think not very).
Re: What Is AGI-Hard
#3As always, what can't be done is shrinking.
Re: What Is AGI-Hard
#4I like the concept of AGI-hard and the characterization of the common traps of AI productization feels accurate. One shortcoming of the analogy is that we have methods to prove when a problem is NP-hard. Are there ways to prove a problem is AGI-hard? Can it even be rigorously characterized? Relying on someone asserting it on Twitter feels unsatisfying (e.g. how accurate would experts have been at predicting the curre…
Exactly – "perfect visual reasoning is AGI-hard", the tweet that seems to have inspired this, suffers from several problems:
• "perfect visual reasoning" is not a thing, because "visual reasoning" isn't clearly defined. Nor "reasoning". Most importantly, neither is "perfect".
• It's not clear whether it's even accurate to say you need "perfect visual reasoning" for the application at hand (driving)
Determining whether something is AGI-hard is AGI-hard.
Re: What Is AGI-Hard
#5Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI-complete
(AI hard redirected to this)
Re: What Is AGI-Hard
#6This article is a bit too hand-wavy for my taste. As a buzzword, AGI Hard sounds cool but until intelligence is more strictly defined (and the modifiers “artificial” and “general” aren’t helping) AGI will always be something we talk about rather than something known.
I was also a bit amused at the list of things which the author also claims to be AGI hard. But this is just a list of things we think are difficult. Physics? Calculus? Programming other AI agents?
Why not add chess to the list? The fact that we already have an algorithm that enables computers to teach themselves to play chess is not an a priori reason to exclude it.
Re: What Is AGI-Hard
#7I'm not sold on the concept of AI-hard or AI-complete problems.
For example, the Wikipedia article on AI-completeness mentions Bongard problems and Autonomous driving as examples of problems that might be AI-complete.
OK, so if I have an AI drives autonomously, is there some known querying strategy that I can use to make it solve Bongard problems? Can a Bongard problem-solving AI be made, by some known procedure to drive a car?
Without such reductions, at least the analogy to NP-hardness is incomplete. I believe these reductions are precisely what makes NP-hardness such a useful concept; even though we still haven't proven that any of these problems are objectively "hard," we are still able to show that if one of them is hard, then the others are as well!
Re: What Is AGI-Hard
#8> Can AI invent calculus from first principles?
The thing is, most people can't. In fact, if you reinvented calculus yourselves, you should be very proud of your mathematical ability.
Re: What Is AGI-Hard
#9This article is a bit too hand-wavy for my taste. As a buzzword, AGI Hard sounds cool but until intelligence is more strictly defined (and the modifiers “artificial” and “general” aren’t helping) AGI will always be something we talk about rather than something known. I was also a bit amused at the list of things which the author also claims to be AGI hard. But this is just a list of things we think are difficult. Phy…
> This article is a bit too hand-wavy for my taste.
From the article: "I think this is the sort of debate that makes good podcast fodder". So the article author admits that.
It's hand-wavy on vision. Parts of vision are not "AGI-hard". A key component of self-driving is something that can determine whether a volume of space is empty, occupied, or ambiguous. It's necessary to have something that does not report "empty" for occupied areas, and has a reasonably high accuracy rate on not emitting false reports of "occupied". There are sensor suites which can do that. LIDAR can do that. If you have data from a few viewpoints, you can do that. Musk has tried to turn it into an AGI problem, but that's his problem, not a property of the problem space. (If you look at California DMV autonomous vehicle crash reports, the successful companies have solved "is that area empty", and are now struggling with "what is that other car/pedestrian/bicycle going to do?")
What's inherently hard is always a good question. Aristotle thought that the human ability to do arithmetic was a key indicator of intelligence. Now we know just how few gates it takes to do arithmetic. A big surprise, and shock to many, has been the discovery that punditry, and what passes for intellectualism in some quarters, can be done by a really good autocomplete with a big training set. This says more about human discourse than it does about AI.
As I've pointed out before, we're still nowhere on "common sense", defined as not screwing up in the next 30 seconds. This is a big problem now that there are systems able to produce huge volumes of plausible blithering that's factually wrong.
Re: What Is AGI-Hard
#10> Can AI invent calculus from first principles? The thing is, most people can't. In fact, if you reinvented calculus yourselves, you should be very proud of your mathematical ability.
I believe AI is plural here and relates to general existing population.
It’s not like asking if Stable Diffusion or ChatGPT can do it. Maybe there is specialized commercial AI that aren’t so widely known.
There exist right now people with low levels of physical and mental capabilities that current state of AI knowledge surpasses it by miles. We don’t go around saying “AI is better than humans”, even though - technically - it can be in some selected cases.