Opšta veštačka inteligencija (AGI) je vrsta veštačke inteligencije (VI) koja može da radi jednako dobro ili bolje od ljudi na širokom spektru kognitivnih zadataka, za razliku od uske veštačke inteligencije, koja je dizajnirana za specifične zadatke. To je jedna od mnogobrojnih definicija jake VI. It is one of various definitions of strong AI.
Stvaranje AGI je primarni cilj istraživanja veštačke inteligencije i kompanija kao što su OpenAI, Dipmajnd i Antropik. Istraživanje iz 2020. identifikovalo je 72 aktivna AGI R&D projekta u 37 zemalja.
Vremenski okvir za razvoj AGI ostaje predmet stalne debate među istraživačima i stručnjacima. Prema podacima iz 2023. godine, deo javnog mnjenja smatra da bi to moglo biti moguće za nekoliko godina ili decenija; drugi smatraju da bi to moglo potrajati vek ili duže; a manjina veruje da se to možda nikada neće postići. Postoji debata o tačnoj definiciji AGI, kao i o tome da li su moderni veliki jezički modeli (LLM) kao što je GPT-4 rani, nekompletni oblici AGI. AGI je uobičajena tema u naučnoj fantastici i studijama budućnosti.
Postoji spor oko potencijala da AGI predstavlja pretnju čovečanstvu; na primer, OpenAI tvrdi da oni to tretiraju kao egzistencijalni rizik, dok drugi smatraju da je razvoj AGI previše udaljen da bi predstavljao rizik.
Terminologija
Opšta veštačka inteligencija je takođe poznat kao jaka VI,: Kurzweil describes strong AI as "machine intelligence with the full range of human intelligence." puna VI, veštačka inteligencija na nivou čoveka ili opšta inteligentna akcija. Međutim, neki akademski izvori rezervišu termin „jaka AI“ za kompjuterske programe koji doživljavaju osete ili svest. Nasuprot tome, slaba VI (ili uska VI) je u stanju da reši specifičan problem, ali joj nedostaju opšte kognitivne sposobnosti. Neki akademski izvori koriste „slabu veštačku inteligenciju“ za sve programe koji niti doživljavaju svest niti imaju um u istom smislu kao ljudi.
Povezani koncepti uključuju veštačku superinteligenciju i transformativnu veštačku inteligenciju. Veštačka superinteligencija (ASI) je hipotetički tip AGI koji je generalno mnogo inteligentniji od ljudi, dok se pojam transformativne VI odnosi na VI koja ima veliki uticaj na društvo, na primer, slično poljoprivrednoj ili industrijskoj revoluciji.
Napomene
Reference
Literatura
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . . ,. George Dyson, historian of computing, writes (in what might be called "Dyson's Law") that "Any system simple enough to be understandable will not be complicated enough to behave intelligently, while any system complicated enough to behave intelligently will be too complicated to understand." (p. 197.) Computer scientist Alex Pentland writes: "Current AI machine-learning algorithms are, at their core, dead simple stupid. They work, but they work by brute force." (p. 198.) , . ,. "AIs are like autistic savants and will remain so for the foreseeable future.... AIs lack common sense and can easily make errors that a human never would... They are also liable to take our instructions too literally, giving us precisely what we asked for instead of what we actually wanted." (p. 93.) Gleick, James, "The Fate of Free Will" (review of Kevin J. Mitchell, , Princeton University Press, 2023, 333 pp.), . "Agency is what distinguishes us from machines. For biological creatures, reason and purpose come from acting in the world and experiencing the consequences. Artificial intelligences – disembodied, strangers to blood, sweat, and tears – have no occasion for that." (p. 30.) Hanna, Alex, and Emily M. Bender, ,. "[H]ype [about "existential risks"] surrounds many AI firms, but their technology already enables myriad harms, including... discrimination in housing, criminal justice, and health care, as well as the spread of hate speech and misinformation... Large language models extrude... fluent... coherent-seeming text but have no understanding of what the text means, let alone the ability to reason.... (p. 69.) [T]hat output... becomes a noxious... insidious pollutant of our information ecosystem.... [T]oo many... publications [about] AI come from corporate labs or... academic groups that receive... industry funding. Many of these publications are based on junk science [that] is nonreproducible... is full of hype, and uses evaluation methods that do not measure what they purport to... Meanwhile 'AI doomers' cite this junk science... to [misdirect] attention [to] the fantasy of all-powerful machines possibly going rogue and destroying humanity." (p. 70.) Hughes-Castleberry, Kenna. , . ,. "This murder mystery competition has revealed that although NLP (natural-language processing) models are capable of incredible feats, their abilities are very much limited by the amount of context they receive. This [...] could cause [difficulties] for researchers who hope to use them to do things such as analyze ancient languages. In some cases, there are few historical records on long-gone civilizations to serve as training data for such a purpose." (p. 82.) Immerwahr, Daniel, "Your Lying Eyes: People now use A.I. to generate fake videos indistinguishable from real ones. How much does it matter?", The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 54–59. "If by 'deepfakes' we mean realistic videos produced using artificial intelligence that actually deceive people, then they barely exist. The fakes aren't deep, and the deeps aren't fake. [...] A.I.-generated videos are not, in general, operating in our media as counterfeited evidence. Their role better resembles that of cartoons, especially smutty ones." (p. 59.) , . ,. Marcus points out a so far insuperable stumbling block to artificial intelligence: an incapacity for reliable disambiguation. "[V]irtually every sentence [that people generate] is ambiguous, often in multiple ways. Our brain is so good at comprehending language that we do not usually notice." A prominent example is the "pronoun disambiguation problem" ("PDP"): a machine has no way of determining to whom or what a pronoun in a sentence—such as "he", "she" or "it"—refers. ,. Press, Eyal, "In Front of Their Faces: Does facial-recognition technology lead police to ignore contradictory evidence?", The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 20–26. ,. "Despite its high IQ, ChatGPT fails at tasks that require real humanlike reasoning or an understanding of the physical and social world.... ChatGPT seemed unable to reason logically and tried to rely on its vast database of... facts derived from online texts."
Spoljašnje veze The AGI portal maintained by Pei Wang
Категорија:Вештачка интелигенција Категорија:Нерешени проблеми у рачунарству