Artificial basic intelligence (AGI) is a kind of expert system (AI) that matches or surpasses human cognitive capabilities throughout a large range of cognitive tasks. This contrasts with narrow AI, which is restricted to particular tasks. [1] Artificial superintelligence (ASI), on the other hand, describes AGI that considerably exceeds human cognitive abilities. AGI is thought about one of the meanings of strong AI.

Creating AGI is a primary goal of AI research and of companies such as OpenAI [2] and Meta. [3] A 2020 study determined 72 active AGI research study and development projects throughout 37 countries. [4]
The timeline for achieving AGI stays a subject of continuous debate amongst researchers and professionals. Since 2023, some argue that it may be possible in years or years; others preserve it may take a century or longer; a minority think it might never ever be accomplished; and another minority claims that it is already here. [5] [6] Notable AI scientist Geoffrey Hinton has revealed concerns about the quick development towards AGI, suggesting it might be accomplished sooner than lots of expect. [7]
There is argument on the specific meaning of AGI and relating to whether contemporary large language designs (LLMs) such as GPT-4 are early types of AGI. [8] AGI is a typical subject in sci-fi and futures research studies. [9] [10]
Contention exists over whether AGI represents an existential danger. [11] [12] [13] Many specialists on AI have actually stated that alleviating the risk of human termination positioned by AGI needs to be a global concern. [14] [15] Others discover the advancement of AGI to be too remote to present such a danger. [16] [17]
Terminology

AGI is also known as strong AI, [18] [19] full AI, [20] human-level AI, [5] human-level smart AI, or basic intelligent action. [21]
Some academic sources book the term strong AI for computer programs that experience sentience or consciousness. [a] In contrast, weak AI (or narrow AI) is able to solve one specific problem however lacks general cognitive capabilities. [22] [19] Some scholastic sources utilize weak AI to refer more broadly to any programs that neither experience awareness nor have a mind in the exact same sense as human beings. [a]
Related ideas consist of synthetic superintelligence and transformative AI. An artificial superintelligence (ASI) is a theoretical type of AGI that is far more generally smart than humans, [23] while the notion of transformative AI connects to AI having a big impact on society, for instance, similar to the agricultural or industrial transformation. [24]
A framework for classifying AGI in levels was proposed in 2023 by Google DeepMind scientists. They define 5 levels of AGI: emerging, proficient, specialist, virtuoso, and superhuman. For instance, a qualified AGI is specified as an AI that exceeds 50% of knowledgeable grownups in a wide range of non-physical jobs, and a superhuman AGI (i.e. an artificial superintelligence) is likewise specified however with a limit of 100%. They consider large language designs like ChatGPT or LLaMA 2 to be instances of emerging AGI. [25]
Characteristics

Various popular meanings of intelligence have actually been proposed. Among the leading propositions is the Turing test. However, there are other widely known definitions, and some researchers disagree with the more popular approaches. [b]
Intelligence traits

Researchers typically hold that intelligence is required to do all of the following: [27]
factor, use strategy, resolve puzzles, and make judgments under unpredictability represent understanding, consisting of good sense knowledge strategy find out

• interact in natural language
• if essential, integrate these skills in conclusion of any given goal

Many interdisciplinary approaches (e.g. cognitive science, computational intelligence, and decision making) consider extra qualities such as creativity (the capability to form novel mental images and concepts) [28] and autonomy. [29]
Computer-based systems that show a number of these capabilities exist (e.g. see computational creativity, automated reasoning, decision assistance system, robotic, evolutionary computation, smart agent). There is argument about whether contemporary AI systems have them to an adequate degree.

Physical qualities

Other capabilities are thought about desirable in intelligent systems, as they might affect intelligence or aid in its expression. These consist of: [30]
- the ability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc), and - the ability to act (e.g. move and manipulate things, modification area to explore, and so on).
This consists of the ability to detect and react to threat. [31]
Although the ability to sense (e.g. see, hear, etc) and the capability to act (e.g. relocation and manipulate objects, change place to check out, etc) can be desirable for some intelligent systems, [30] these physical abilities are not strictly needed for an entity to qualify as AGI-particularly under the thesis that large language models (LLMs) may currently be or end up being AGI. Even from a less positive point of view on LLMs, there is no company requirement for an AGI to have a human-like kind; being a silicon-based computational system is adequate, offered 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 been proscribed a specific physical personification and therefore does not require a capability for locomotion or standard eyes and ears. [32]
Tests for human-level AGI

Several tests suggested to validate human-level AGI have actually been considered, including: [33] [34]
The concept of the test is that the machine has to try and pretend to be a male, by answering concerns put to it, and it will just pass if the pretence is fairly convincing. A significant part of a jury, who should not be skilled about makers, need to be taken in by the pretence. [37]
AI-complete problems

A problem is informally called AI-complete or AI-hard if it is thought that in order to solve it, one would require to carry out AGI, due to the fact that the option is beyond the abilities of a purpose-specific algorithm. [47]
There are numerous issues that have been conjectured to need general intelligence to resolve as well as human beings. Examples consist of computer system vision, natural language understanding, and handling unforeseen scenarios while fixing any real-world issue. [48] Even a particular job like translation needs a machine to read and compose in both languages, follow the author's argument (factor), comprehend the context (understanding), and consistently replicate the author's initial intent (social intelligence). All of these issues need to be solved concurrently in order to reach human-level maker performance.

However, a number of these tasks can now be carried out by contemporary big language models. According to Stanford University's 2024 AI index, AI has actually reached human-level performance on many standards for checking out comprehension and visual thinking. [49]
History

Classical AI

Modern AI research study started in the mid-1950s. [50] The very first generation of AI researchers were convinced that artificial basic intelligence was possible which it would exist in just a couple of years. [51] AI pioneer Herbert A. Simon composed 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 scientists believed they could develop by the year 2001. AI leader Marvin Minsky was a consultant [53] on the job of making HAL 9000 as realistic as possible according to the consensus predictions of the time. He said in 1967, Within a generation ... the problem of creating 'artificial intelligence' will significantly be resolved. [54]
Several classical AI jobs, such as Doug Lenat's Cyc project (that began in 1984), wiki.tld-wars.space and Allen Newell's Soar task, were directed at AGI.

However, in the early 1970s, it became obvious that scientists had actually grossly underestimated the problem of the task. Funding agencies became doubtful of AGI and put researchers under increasing pressure to produce useful 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 table talk. [58] In response to this and the success of expert systems, both market and government pumped money into the field. [56] [59] However, self-confidence in AI stunningly collapsed in the late 1980s, and the objectives of the Fifth Generation Computer Project were never satisfied. [60] For the 2nd time in twenty years, AI scientists who predicted the imminent achievement of AGI had been mistaken. By the 1990s, AI scientists had a track record for making vain promises. They became unwilling to make forecasts at all [d] and avoided mention of human level artificial intelligence for fear of being labeled wild-eyed dreamer [s]. [62]
Narrow AI research study

In the 1990s and early 21st century, mainstream AI attained commercial success and scholastic respectability by focusing on specific sub-problems where AI can produce verifiable results and industrial applications, such as speech acknowledgment and recommendation algorithms. [63] These applied AI systems are now utilized extensively throughout the innovation industry, and research in this vein is heavily funded in both academic community and market. As of 2018 [upgrade], development in this field was considered an emerging pattern, and a fully grown phase was anticipated to be reached in more than ten years. [64]
At the turn of the century, many traditional AI scientists [65] hoped that strong AI might be established by integrating programs that fix various sub-problems. Hans Moravec composed in 1988:

I am confident that this bottom-up path to expert system will one day fulfill the conventional top-down route over half method, all set to supply the real-world skills and the commonsense understanding that has been so frustratingly evasive in reasoning programs. Fully smart makers will result when the metaphorical golden spike is driven joining the 2 efforts. [65]
However, even at the time, this was disputed. For instance, Stevan Harnad of Princeton University concluded his 1990 paper on the symbol grounding hypothesis by mentioning:

The expectation has actually often been voiced that top-down (symbolic) approaches to modeling cognition will somehow fulfill bottom-up (sensory) approaches somewhere in between. If the grounding considerations in this paper are legitimate, then this expectation is hopelessly modular and there is actually only one feasible path from sense to symbols: from the ground up. A free-floating symbolic level like the software level of a computer will never be reached by this route (or vice versa) - nor is it clear why we ought to even try to reach such a level, since it appears arriving would simply amount to uprooting our symbols from their intrinsic significances (therefore merely decreasing ourselves to the functional equivalent of a programmable computer system). [66]
Modern artificial basic intelligence research

The term artificial general intelligence was used as early as 1997, by Mark Gubrud [67] in a conversation of the implications of completely automated military production and operations. A mathematical formalism of AGI was proposed by Marcus Hutter in 2000. Named AIXI, the proposed AGI agent increases the capability to please 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 likewise called universal expert system. [70]
The term AGI was re-introduced and popularized 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 outcomes. The 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 first university course was provided in 2010 [74] and 2011 [75] at Plovdiv University, Bulgaria by Todor Arnaudov. MIT provided a course on AGI in 2018, organized by Lex Fridman and including a number of guest speakers.

As of 2023 [upgrade], a small number of computer system scientists are active in AGI research, and lots of contribute to a series of AGI conferences. However, increasingly more scientists have an interest in open-ended learning, [76] [77] which is the concept of enabling AI to continuously find out and innovate like humans do.

Feasibility

As of 2023, the advancement and prospective achievement of AGI remains a topic of intense dispute within the AI neighborhood. While conventional agreement held that AGI was a far-off goal, recent developments have led some researchers and market figures to declare that early kinds of AGI might already exist. [78] AI pioneer Herbert A. Simon hypothesized in 1965 that devices will be capable, within twenty years, of doing any work a man can do. This forecast stopped working to come real. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen believed that such intelligence is not likely in the 21st century because it would require unforeseeable and basically unforeseeable developments and a scientifically deep understanding of cognition. [79] Writing in The Guardian, roboticist Alan Winfield claimed the gulf in between modern-day computing and human-level expert system is as wide as the gulf between current area flight and useful faster-than-light spaceflight. [80]
A more challenge is the absence of clearness in specifying what intelligence requires. Does it require awareness? Must it display the ability to set objectives along with pursue them? Is it simply a matter of scale such that if model sizes increase adequately, intelligence will emerge? Are centers such as planning, thinking, and causal understanding needed? Does intelligence need clearly reproducing the brain and its specific professors? Does it need emotions? [81]
Most AI researchers believe strong AI can be accomplished in the future, but some thinkers, like Hubert Dreyfus and Roger Penrose, deny the possibility of achieving strong AI. [82] [83] John McCarthy is amongst those who think human-level AI will be accomplished, however that the present level of development is such that a date can not properly be forecasted. [84] AI experts' views on the expediency of AGI wax and subside. Four surveys performed in 2012 and 2013 recommended that the mean price quote among experts for when they would be 50% confident AGI would show up was 2040 to 2050, depending upon the poll, with the mean being 2081. Of the specialists, 16.5% addressed with never ever when asked the very same concern however with a 90% self-confidence instead. [85] [86] Further current AGI progress considerations can be found above Tests for validating human-level AGI.

A report by Stuart Armstrong and Kaj Sotala of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute discovered that over [a] 60-year amount of time there is a strong predisposition towards anticipating the arrival of human-level AI as in between 15 and 25 years from the time the prediction was made. They examined 95 predictions made in between 1950 and 2012 on when human-level AI will come about. [87]
In 2023, Microsoft researchers released a detailed examination of GPT-4. They concluded: Given the breadth and depth of GPT-4's capabilities, we think that it might reasonably be deemed an early (yet still incomplete) variation of an artificial basic intelligence (AGI) system. [88] Another study in 2023 reported that GPT-4 outshines 99% of humans on the Torrance tests of creative thinking. [89] [90]
Blaise Agüera y Arcas and Peter Norvig composed in 2023 that a significant level of general intelligence has currently been attained with frontier models. They composed that unwillingness to this view comes from 4 main factors: a healthy hesitation about metrics for AGI, an ideological commitment to alternative AI theories or methods, a devotion to human (or biological) exceptionalism, or a concern about the financial implications of AGI. [91]
2023 likewise marked the introduction of large multimodal designs (large language models capable of processing or producing numerous modalities such as text, audio, and images). [92]
In 2024, OpenAI released o1-preview, the very first of a series of models that invest more time believing before they react. According to Mira Murati, this ability to believe before responding represents a new, additional paradigm. It improves design outputs by investing more computing power when generating the response, whereas the model scaling paradigm enhances outputs by increasing the design size, training information and training compute power. [93] [94]
An OpenAI employee, Vahid Kazemi, claimed in 2024 that the business had actually accomplished AGI, specifying, In my viewpoint, we have actually currently accomplished AGI and it's a lot more clear with O1. Kazemi clarified that while the AI is not yet better than any human at any job, it is much better than the majority of humans at most tasks. He also dealt with criticisms that big language models (LLMs) simply follow predefined patterns, comparing their knowing procedure to the clinical technique of observing, hypothesizing, and validating. These declarations have actually sparked dispute, as they rely on a broad and non-traditional meaning of AGI-traditionally understood as AI that matches human intelligence across all domains. Critics argue that, while OpenAI's models show remarkable flexibility, they might not completely meet this requirement. Notably, Kazemi's remarks came quickly after OpenAI removed AGI from the regards to its collaboration with Microsoft, triggering speculation about the business's strategic intentions. [95]
Timescales

Progress in artificial intelligence has historically gone through durations of rapid development separated by periods when development appeared to stop. [82] Ending each hiatus were basic advances in hardware, software application or both to develop space for additional development. [82] [98] [99] For instance, the computer system hardware readily available in the twentieth century was not adequate to execute deep learning, which needs 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 genuinely versatile AGI is developed vary from ten years to over a century. Since 2007 [update], the agreement in the AGI research neighborhood seemed 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 plausible. [103] Mainstream AI scientists have offered a vast array of viewpoints on whether development will be this fast. A 2012 meta-analysis of 95 such opinions found a bias towards predicting that the beginning of AGI would occur within 16-26 years for contemporary and historic forecasts alike. That paper has been criticized for how it classified viewpoints as specialist or non-expert. [104]
In 2012, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey Hinton developed a neural network called AlexNet, which won the ImageNet competitors with a top-5 test error rate of 15.3%, significantly much better than the second-best entry's rate of 26.3% (the traditional method utilized a weighted amount of scores from different pre-defined classifiers). [105] AlexNet was considered the initial ground-breaker of the existing deep knowing wave. [105]
In 2017, researchers Feng Liu, Yong Shi, and Ying Liu conducted intelligence tests on publicly offered and freely available weak AI such as Google AI, Apple's Siri, and others. At the maximum, these AIs reached an IQ value of about 47, which corresponds approximately to a six-year-old kid in first grade. An adult concerns about 100 usually. Similar tests were brought out in 2014, with the IQ rating reaching a maximum worth of 27. [106] [107]
In 2020, OpenAI established GPT-3, a language design efficient in performing many diverse jobs without particular training. According to Gary Grossman in a VentureBeat post, 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 exact same year, Jason Rohrer used his GPT-3 account to develop a chatbot, and provided a chatbot-developing platform called Project December. OpenAI requested changes 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 various jobs. [110]
In 2023, Microsoft Research released a research study on an early variation of OpenAI's GPT-4, competing that it exhibited more general intelligence than previous AI models and demonstrated human-level efficiency in jobs covering multiple domains, such as mathematics, coding, and law. This research study triggered a debate on whether GPT-4 could be considered an early, insufficient variation of synthetic basic intelligence, highlighting the requirement for further expedition and evaluation of such systems. [111]
In 2023, the AI researcher Geoffrey Hinton mentioned that: [112]
The idea that this stuff might really get smarter than individuals - a few people thought that, [...] But the majority of people believed it was way off. And I thought it was way off. I believed it was 30 to 50 years or even longer away. Obviously, I no longer think that.

In May 2023, Demis Hassabis similarly said that The development in the last couple of years has actually been pretty unbelievable, which he sees no reason that it would slow down, anticipating AGI within a years or even a couple of years. [113] In March 2024, Nvidia's CEO, Jensen Huang, stated his expectation that within five years, AI would can passing any test a minimum of in addition to people. [114] In June 2024, the AI scientist Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former OpenAI staff member, approximated AGI by 2027 to be noticeably plausible. [115]
Whole brain emulation

While the development of transformer designs like in ChatGPT is considered the most appealing path to AGI, [116] [117] entire brain emulation can serve as an alternative method. With entire brain simulation, a brain design is built by scanning and mapping a biological brain in detail, and after that copying and mimicing it on a computer system or another computational device. The simulation model should be adequately loyal to the original, so that it behaves in virtually the very same way as the original brain. [118] Whole brain emulation is a type of brain simulation that is discussed in computational neuroscience and neuroinformatics, and for medical research study purposes. It has actually been gone over in expert system research study [103] as an approach to strong AI. Neuroimaging innovations that might provide the essential comprehensive understanding are enhancing rapidly, and futurist Ray Kurzweil in the book The Singularity Is Near [102] forecasts that a map of enough quality will appear on a similar timescale to the computing power needed to imitate it.

Early approximates

For low-level brain simulation, a very powerful cluster of computer systems or GPUs would be required, given the massive amount of synapses within the human brain. Each of the 1011 (one hundred billion) neurons 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 decreases with age, stabilizing by adulthood. Estimates differ for an adult, ranging from 1014 to 5 × 1014 synapses (100 to 500 trillion). [120] A quote of the brain's processing power, based on a basic switch design for neuron activity, is around 1014 (100 trillion) synaptic updates per second (SUPS). [121]
In 1997, Kurzweil took a look at different estimates for the hardware required to equate to the human brain and embraced a figure of 1016 calculations per second (cps). [e] (For contrast, if a computation was equivalent to one floating-point operation - a measure utilized to rate current supercomputers - then 1016 calculations would be equivalent to 10 petaFLOPS, attained in 2011, while 1018 was achieved in 2022.) He utilized this figure to predict the required hardware would be available sometime in 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 initiative active from 2013 to 2023, has actually established a particularly comprehensive and openly accessible atlas of the human brain. [124] In 2023, scientists from Duke University carried out a high-resolution scan of a mouse brain.

Criticisms of simulation-based techniques

The artificial nerve cell design presumed by Kurzweil and utilized in many existing synthetic neural network executions is simple compared with biological neurons. A brain simulation would likely need to capture the detailed cellular behaviour of biological nerve cells, currently comprehended just in broad overview. The overhead introduced by complete modeling of the biological, chemical, and physical details of neural behaviour (especially on a molecular scale) would need computational powers several orders of magnitude bigger than Kurzweil's price quote. In addition, the quotes do not account for glial cells, which are known to contribute in cognitive procedures. [125]
A basic criticism of the simulated brain technique obtains from embodied cognition theory which asserts that human embodiment is an important element of human intelligence and is essential to ground meaning. [126] [127] If this theory is right, any completely functional brain design will need to incorporate more than simply the neurons (e.g., a robotic body). Goertzel [103] proposes virtual personification (like in metaverses like Second Life) as an alternative, but it is unknown whether this would be sufficient.

Philosophical viewpoint

Strong AI as defined in viewpoint

In 1980, philosopher John Searle created the term strong AI as part of his Chinese room argument. [128] He proposed a difference between two hypotheses about expert system: [f]
Strong AI hypothesis: An expert system system can have a mind and awareness. Weak AI hypothesis: A synthetic intelligence system can (only) act like it believes and has a mind and consciousness.
The first one he called strong due to the fact that it makes a stronger declaration: it presumes something special has actually occurred to the machine that surpasses those capabilities that we can check. The behaviour of a weak AI device would be precisely identical to a strong AI maker, but the latter would also have subjective mindful experience. This usage is likewise common in scholastic AI research and books. [129]
In contrast to Searle and traditional AI, some futurists such as Ray Kurzweil use the term strong AI to mean human level artificial general intelligence. [102] This is not the very same as Searle's strong AI, unless it is presumed that awareness is necessary for human-level AGI. Academic theorists such as Searle do not believe that holds true, and to most expert system researchers the question is out-of-scope. [130]
Mainstream AI is most interested in how a program acts. [131] According to Russell and Norvig, as long as the program works, they don't care if you call it real or a simulation. [130] If the program can act as if it has a mind, then there is no requirement to know if it really has mind - certainly, there would be no other way to inform. For AI research, Searle's weak AI hypothesis is comparable to the statement artificial general intelligence is possible. Thus, according to Russell and Norvig, most AI researchers take the weak AI hypothesis for given, and do not care about the strong AI hypothesis. [130] Thus, for academic AI research study, Strong AI and AGI are 2 various things.

Consciousness

Consciousness can have different meanings, and some elements play considerable functions in sci-fi and the ethics of expert system:

Sentience (or phenomenal awareness): The ability to feel perceptions or emotions subjectively, instead of the ability to factor about perceptions. Some philosophers, such as David Chalmers, use the term consciousness to refer specifically to incredible awareness, which is roughly equivalent to life. [132] Determining why and how subjective experience develops is referred to as the hard issue of awareness. [133] Thomas Nagel explained in 1974 that it seems like something to be conscious. If we are not mindful, then it does not feel like anything. Nagel utilizes the example of a bat: we can smartly ask what does it feel like to be a bat? However, we are not likely to ask what does it seem like to be a toaster? Nagel concludes that a bat seems mindful (i.e., has awareness) however a toaster does not. [134] In 2022, a Google engineer claimed that the business's AI chatbot, LaMDA, had actually accomplished life, though this claim was extensively disputed by other experts. [135]
Self-awareness: To have conscious awareness of oneself as a different individual, specifically to be consciously aware of one's own thoughts. This is opposed to merely being the topic of one's thought-an os or debugger is able to be familiar with itself (that is, to represent itself in the same method it represents everything else)-however this is not what individuals generally imply when they utilize the term self-awareness. [g]
These characteristics have an ethical dimension. AI sentience would trigger issues of well-being and legal defense, likewise to animals. [136] Other aspects of consciousness related to cognitive abilities are likewise appropriate to the principle of AI rights. [137] Figuring out how to integrate innovative AI with existing legal and social frameworks is an emerging concern. [138]
Benefits

AGI could have a wide array of applications. If oriented towards such goals, AGI might help alleviate different problems in the world such as hunger, poverty and health issue. [139]
AGI might enhance performance and efficiency in many jobs. For example, in public health, AGI could speed up medical research, notably against cancer. [140] It might take care of the elderly, [141] and equalize access to fast, top quality medical diagnostics. It could provide enjoyable, low-cost and customized education. [141] The requirement to work to subsist could become outdated if the wealth produced is appropriately rearranged. [141] [142] This also raises the concern of the location of humans in a drastically automated society.

AGI might likewise help to make rational decisions, and to prepare for and avoid catastrophes. It could likewise assist to gain the benefits of possibly devastating technologies such as nanotechnology or climate engineering, while preventing the associated threats. [143] If an AGI's primary objective is to avoid existential catastrophes such as human termination (which could be challenging if the Vulnerable World Hypothesis ends up being real), [144] it might take steps to drastically minimize the dangers [143] while reducing the impact of these steps on our quality of life.

Risks

Existential risks

AGI may represent several types of existential risk, which are threats that threaten the premature extinction of Earth-originating intelligent life or the long-term and extreme damage of its potential for desirable future advancement. [145] The danger of human extinction from AGI has actually been the subject of many debates, but there is also the possibility that the advancement of AGI would result in a permanently problematic future. Notably, it might 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 might irreversibly entrench it, avoiding ethical development. [146] Furthermore, AGI might help with mass security and brainwashing, which could be used to produce a stable repressive worldwide totalitarian program. [147] [148] There is likewise a danger for the devices themselves. If machines that are sentient or otherwise deserving of moral factor to consider are mass produced in the future, participating in a civilizational course that forever disregards their welfare and interests might be an existential disaster. [149] [150] Considering just how much AGI might improve mankind's future and help decrease other existential threats, Toby Ord calls these existential dangers an argument for proceeding with due caution, not for deserting AI. [147]
Risk of loss of control and human extinction

The thesis that AI positions an existential danger for human beings, and that this threat needs more attention, is questionable but has been endorsed in 2023 by lots of public figures, AI researchers 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 slammed extensive indifference:

So, dealing with possible futures of enormous advantages and risks, the professionals are certainly doing everything possible to make sure the best outcome, right? Wrong. If a superior alien civilisation sent us a message saying, 'We'll get here in a couple of years,' would we simply 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 potential fate of humanity has in some cases been compared to the fate of gorillas threatened by human activities. The contrast states that higher intelligence permitted humankind to dominate gorillas, which are now vulnerable in ways that they might not have anticipated. As an outcome, the gorilla has become a threatened types, not out of malice, however merely as a security damage from human activities. [154]
The skeptic Yann LeCun thinks about that AGIs will have no desire to dominate humankind which we ought to take care not to anthropomorphize them and analyze their intents as we would for people. He stated that people won't be wise enough to design super-intelligent devices, yet ridiculously dumb to the point of giving it moronic objectives with no safeguards. [155] On the other side, the principle of instrumental merging suggests that almost whatever their goals, smart agents will have reasons to attempt to survive and acquire more power as intermediary actions to attaining these goals. Which this does not need having emotions. [156]
Many scholars who are worried about existential risk advocate for more research into solving the control issue to answer the concern: what types of safeguards, algorithms, or architectures can programmers execute to increase the probability that their recursively-improving AI would continue to behave in a friendly, rather than devastating, manner after it reaches superintelligence? [157] [158] Solving the control issue is made complex by the AI arms race (which could cause a race to the bottom of safety preventative measures in order to launch items before rivals), [159] and the use of AI in weapon systems. [160]
The thesis that AI can position existential threat likewise has critics. Skeptics typically state that AGI is not likely in the short-term, or that concerns about AGI sidetrack from other problems associated with existing AI. [161] Former Google scams czar Shuman Ghosemajumder thinks about that for lots of people beyond the technology industry, existing chatbots and LLMs are currently perceived as though they were AGI, leading to additional misunderstanding and worry. [162]
Skeptics sometimes charge that the thesis is crypto-religious, with an unreasonable belief in the possibility of superintelligence replacing an irrational belief in an omnipotent God. [163] Some researchers believe that the interaction campaigns on AI existential danger by certain AI groups (such as OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepMind, and Conjecture) might be an at attempt at regulatory capture and to inflate interest in their products. [164] [165]
In 2023, the CEOs of Google DeepMind, OpenAI and Anthropic, in addition to other market leaders and researchers, released a joint statement asserting that Mitigating the danger of termination from AI must be an international priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war. [152]
Mass unemployment

Researchers from OpenAI approximated that 80% of the U.S. workforce might have at least 10% of their work jobs impacted by the intro of LLMs, while around 19% of employees may see a minimum of 50% of their tasks impacted. [166] [167] They consider office workers to be the most exposed, for example mathematicians, accountants or web designers. [167] AGI might have a better autonomy, ability to make choices, to user interface with other computer system tools, however also to manage robotized bodies.

According to Stephen Hawking, the outcome of automation on the quality of life will depend upon how the wealth will be rearranged: [142]
Everyone can delight in a life of elegant leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most individuals can wind up miserably bad if the machine-owners effectively lobby versus wealth redistribution. So far, the trend appears to be toward the second option, with innovation driving ever-increasing inequality

Elon Musk thinks about that the automation of society will require governments to adopt a universal basic income. [168]
See also

Artificial brain - Software and hardware with cognitive capabilities similar to those of the animal or human brain AI impact AI safety - Research area on making AI safe and advantageous AI positioning - AI conformance to the intended objective A.I. Rising - 2018 film directed by Lazar Bodroža Expert system Automated artificial intelligence - Process of automating the application of machine learning BRAIN Initiative - Collaborative public-private research study initiative announced by the Obama administration China Brain Project Future of Humanity Institute - Defunct Oxford interdisciplinary research study centre General game playing - Ability of synthetic intelligence to play different video games Generative artificial intelligence - AI system capable of generating material in response to triggers Human Brain Project - Scientific research study project Intelligence amplification - Use of details innovation to augment human intelligence (IA). Machine ethics - Moral behaviours of man-made devices. Moravec's paradox. Multi-task learning - Solving several machine discovering jobs 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 movement. Synthetic intelligence - Alternate term for or form of synthetic intelligence. Transfer learning - Machine knowing strategy. Loebner Prize - Annual AI competition. Hardware for synthetic intelligence - Hardware specially designed and enhanced for expert system. Weak expert system - Form of synthetic intelligence.
Notes

^ a b See below for the origin of the term strong AI, and see the academic meaning of strong AI and weak AI in the article Chinese space. ^ AI founder John McCarthy writes: we can not yet define in basic what type of computational procedures we want to call intelligent. [26] (For a conversation of some definitions of intelligence utilized by expert system researchers, see viewpoint of expert system.). ^ The Lighthill report particularly criticized AI's grandiose objectives and led the dismantling of AI research study in England. [55] In the U.S., DARPA ended up being identified to money only mission-oriented direct research study, rather than fundamental undirected research. [56] [57] ^ As AI creator John McCarthy composes it would be a terrific relief to the remainder of the workers in AI if the inventors of brand-new basic formalisms would reveal their hopes in a more secured form than has often been the case. [61] ^ In Mind Children [122] 1015 cps is utilized. More just recently, in 1997, [123] Moravec argued for 108 MIPS which would approximately correspond to 1014 cps. Moravec talks in regards to MIPS, not cps, which is a non-standard term Kurzweil presented. ^ As specified in a standard AI textbook: The assertion that makers could potentially act intelligently (or, maybe better, act as if they were smart) is called the 'weak AI' hypothesis by theorists, and the assertion that devices that do so are in fact thinking (as opposed to simulating 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 developed to carry out a single job. ^ OpenAI Charter. OpenAI. Retrieved 6 April 2023. Our objective is to guarantee that artificial general intelligence advantages all of humanity. ^ Heath, Alex (18 January 2024). Mark Zuckerberg's brand-new goal is producing artificial basic intelligence. The Verge. Retrieved 13 June 2024. Our vision is to develop AI that is much 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 experts in expert system expect 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 quits Google and alerts of danger ahead. The New York City Times. 1 May 2023. Retrieved 2 May 2023. It is hard 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 explores GPT-4. arXiv preprint. arXiv:2303.12712. GPT-4 shows sparks 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 change 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 Artificial Intelligence. The New York City Times. The genuine danger is not AI itself however the way we deploy it. ^ Impressed by expert system? Experts say AGI is coming next, and it has 'existential' dangers. ABC News. 23 March 2023. Retrieved 6 April 2023. AGI might position existential risks to mankind. ^ Bostrom, Nick (2014 ). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2. The very first superintelligence will be the last creation that humankind requires to make. ^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn. The New York City Times. Mitigating the danger of termination from AI need to be an international concern. ^ Statement on AI Risk. Center for AI Safety. Retrieved 1 March 2024. AI professionals alert 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 developing devices that can outthink us in basic ways. ^ LeCun, Yann (June 2023). AGI does not present an existential danger. Medium. There is no factor 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 explains strong AI as machine intelligence with the full 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 utilize for human-level intelligence in the physical symbol system hypothesis. ^ The Open University on Strong and Weak AI. Archived from the original on 25 September 2009. Retrieved 8 October 2007. ^ What is synthetic superintelligence (ASI)?|Definition from TechTarget. Enterprise AI. Retrieved 8 October 2023. ^ Expert system is changing our world - it is on everyone to ensure that it works out. 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 traits is based on the topics covered by major 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 brand-new view of intelligence (The MIT Press, 2007). ISBN 0-2621-6239-3. ^ White, R. W. (1959 ). Motivation reconsidered: The idea of proficiency. Psychological Review. 66 (5 ): 297-333. doi:10.1037/ h0040934. PMID 13844397. S2CID 37385966. ^ White, R. W. (1959 ). Motivation reassessed: The concept of skills. 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 kid - the Turing Test says so. The Guardian. 9 June 2014. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 3 March 2024. ^ Scientists dispute whether computer system '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 differentiate GPT-4 from a human in a Turing test. arXiv:2405.08007 [cs.HC] ^ Varanasi, Lakshmi (21 March 2023). AI designs like ChatGPT and GPT-4 are acing everything from the bar examination to AP Biology. Here's a list of difficult examinations both AI versions have actually passed. Business Insider. Retrieved 30 May 2023. ^ Naysmith, Caleb (7 February 2023). 6 Jobs Expert System Is Already Replacing and pipewiki.org 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 unreliable. The Winograd Schema is obsolete. Coffee is the answer. Analytics India Magazine. Retrieved 3 March 2024. ^ Bhaimiya, Sawdah (20 June 2023). DeepMind's co-founder recommended evaluating an AI chatbot's capability to turn $100,000 into $1 million to measure 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 ). Artificial Intelligence (PDF). In Stuart C. Shapiro (ed.). Encyclopedia of Expert System (Second ed.). New York: John Wiley. pp. 54-57. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 February 2016. (Section 4 is on AI-Complete Tasks.). ^ Yampolskiy, Roman V. (2012 ). Xin-She Yang (ed.). Turing Test as a Defining Feature of AI-Completeness (PDF). Artificial Intelligence, 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 forum.pinoo.com.tr Civilization - Our Fate Made in Machines. Archived from the original on 6 May 2022. Retrieved 12 March 2022. ^ Simon 1965, p. 96 estimated in Crevier 1993, p. 109. ^ Scientist on the Set: An Interview with Marvin Minsky. Archived from the original on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 5 April 2008. ^ Marvin Minsky to Darrach (1970 ), priced estimate 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 initial on 30 September 2008. Retrieved 29 September 2007. ^ Markoff, John (14 October 2005). Behind Expert system, 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 researchers and software application engineers avoided the term artificial intelligence 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 Science 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 Technology. 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 promoted by ... Shane Legg, Mark Gubrud and Ben Goertzel' ^ Wang & Goertzel 2007 ^ First International Summer School in Artificial General Intelligence, Main summer season school: June 22 - July 3, 2009, OpenCog Lab: July 6-9, 2009. Archived from the initial 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 original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020. ^ Избираеми дисциплини 2010/2011 - зимен триместър [Elective courses 2010/2011 - winter 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, synthetic basic intelligence is still a significant challenge. 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 try outs 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, Mark (12 October 2011). The Singularity Isn't Near. MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 17 September 2014. ^ Winfield, Alan. Expert system will not turn into a Frankenstein's monster. The Guardian. Archived from the original on 17 September 2014. Retrieved 17 September 2014. ^ Deane, George (2022 ). Machines That Feel and Think: The Role of Affective Feelings and Mental Action in (Artificial) General Intelligence. Artificial Life. 28 (3 ): 289-309. doi:10.1162/ artl_a_00368. ISSN 1064-5462. PMID 35881678. S2CID 251069071. ^ a b c Clocksin 2003. ^ Fjelland, Ragnar (17 June 2020). Why general artificial intelligence will not be realized. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 7 (1 ): 1-9. doi:10.1057/ s41599-020-0494-4. hdl:11250/ 2726984. ISSN 2662-9992. S2CID 219710554. ^ McCarthy 2007b. ^ Khatchadourian, Raffi (23 November 2015). The Doomsday Invention: Will expert system bring us paradise or damage?. The New Yorker. Archived from the initial on 28 January 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016. ^ Müller, V. C., & Bostrom, N. (2016 ). Future progress in synthetic intelligence: A study of professional opinion. In Fundamental concerns of artificial intelligence (pp. 555-572). Springer, Cham. ^ Armstrong, Stuart, and Kaj Sotala. 2012. How We're Predicting AI-or Failing To. In Beyond AI: Artificial Dreams, modified by Jan Romportl, Pavel Ircing, Eva Žáčková, Michal Polák and Radek Schuster, 52-75. Plzeň: University of West Bohemia ^ Microsoft Now Claims GPT-4 Shows 'Sparks' of General Intelligence. 24 March 2023. ^ Shimek, Cary (6 July 2023). AI Outperforms Humans in Creativity Test. Neuroscience News. Retrieved 20 October 2023. ^ Guzik, Erik E.; Byrge, Christian; Gilde, Christian (1 December 2023). The originality of makers: AI takes the Torrance Test. Journal of Creativity. 33 (3 ): 100065. doi:10.1016/ j.yjoc.2023.100065. ISSN 2713-3745. S2CID 261087185. ^ Arcas, Blaise Agüera y (10 October 2023). Artificial General Intelligence Is Already Here. Noema. ^ Zia, Tehseen (8 January 2024). Unveiling of Large Multimodal Models: Shaping the Landscape of Language Models in 2024. Unite.ai. Retrieved 26 May 2024. ^ Introducing OpenAI o1-preview. OpenAI. 12 September 2024. ^ Knight, Will. OpenAI Announces a New AI Model, Code-Named Strawberry, That Solves Difficult Problems Step by Step. Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 17 September 2024. ^ OpenAI Employee Claims AGI Has Been Achieved. Orbital Today. 13 December 2024. Retrieved 27 December 2024. ^ AI Index: State of AI in 13 Charts. hai.stanford.edu. 15 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024. ^ Next-Gen AI: OpenAI and Meta's Leap Towards Reasoning Machines. Unite.ai. 19 April 2024. Retrieved 7 June 2024. ^ James, Alex P. (2022 ). The Why, What, and How of Artificial General Intelligence Chip Development. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems. 14 (2 ): 333-347. arXiv:2012.06338. doi:10.1109/ TCDS.2021.3069871. ISSN 2379-8920. S2CID 228376556. Archived from the initial on 28 August 2022. Retrieved 28 August 2022. ^ Pei, Jing; Deng, Lei; Song, Sen; Zhao, Mingguo; Zhang, Youhui; Wu, Shuang; Wang, Guanrui; Zou, Zhe; Wu, Zhenzhi; He, Wei; Chen, Feng; Deng, Ning; Wu, Si; Wang, Yu; Wu, Yujie (2019 ). Towards artificial general intelligence with hybrid Tianjic chip architecture. Nature. 572 (7767 ): 106-111. Bibcode:2019 Natur.572..106 P. doi:10.1038/ s41586-019-1424-8. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 31367028. S2CID 199056116. Archived from the initial on 29 August 2022. Retrieved 29 August 2022. ^ Pandey, Mohit; Fernandez, Michael; Gentile, Francesco; Isayev, Olexandr; Tropsha, Alexander; Stern, Abraham C.; Cherkasov, Artem (March 2022). The transformational function of GPU computing and deep knowing in drug discovery. Nature Machine Intelligence. 4 (3 ): 211-221. doi:10.1038/ s42256-022-00463-x. ISSN 2522-5839. S2CID 252081559. ^ Goertzel & Pennachin 2006. ^ a b c (Kurzweil 2005, p. 260). ^ a b c Goertzel 2007. ^ Grace, Katja (2016 ). Error in Armstrong and Sotala 2012. AI Impacts (blog). Archived from the original on 4 December 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020. ^ a b Butz, Martin V. (1 March 2021). Towards Strong AI. KI - Künstliche Intelligenz. 35 (1 ): 91-101. doi:10.1007/ s13218-021-00705-x. ISSN 1610-1987. S2CID 256065190. ^ Liu, Feng; Shi, Yong; Liu, Ying (2017 ). Intelligence Quotient and Intelligence Grade of Artificial Intelligence. Annals of Data Science. 4 (2 ): 179-191. arXiv:1709.10242. doi:10.1007/ s40745-017-0109-0. S2CID 37900130. ^ Brien, Jörn (5 October 2017). Google-KI doppelt so schlau wie Siri [Google AI is twice as wise as Siri - but a six-year-old beats both] (in German). Archived from the initial on 3 January 2019. Retrieved 2 January 2019. ^ Grossman, Gary (3 September 2020). We're entering the AI golden zone in between narrow and general AI. VentureBeat. Archived from the initial on 4 September 2020. Retrieved 5 September 2020. Certainly, too, there are those who declare we are already seeing an early example of an AGI system in the just recently announced GPT-3 natural language processing (NLP) neural network. ... So is GPT-3 the very first example of an AGI system? This is arguable, however the agreement is that it is not AGI. ... If nothing else, GPT-3 informs us there is a happy medium between narrow and basic AI. ^ Quach, Katyanna. A designer built an AI chatbot using GPT-3 that assisted a man speak once again to his late fiancée. OpenAI shut it down. The Register. Archived from the original on 16 October 2021. Retrieved 16 October 2021. ^ Wiggers, Kyle (13 May 2022), DeepMind's brand-new AI can carry out over 600 jobs, from playing video games to controlling robotics, TechCrunch, archived from the initial on 16 June 2022, retrieved 12 June 2022. ^ 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 (22 March 2023). Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early try outs GPT-4. arXiv:2303.12712 [cs.CL] ^ Metz, Cade (1 May 2023). ' The Godfather of A.I.' Leaves Google and Warns of Danger Ahead. The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 7 June 2023. ^ Bove, Tristan. A.I. might measure up to human intelligence in 'simply a few years,' says CEO of Google's primary A.I. research laboratory. Fortune. Retrieved 4 September 2024. ^ Nellis, Stephen (2 March 2024). Nvidia CEO states AI could pass human tests in 5 years. Reuters. ^ Aschenbrenner, Leopold. SITUATIONAL AWARENESS, The Decade Ahead. ^ Sullivan, Mark (18 October 2023). Why everyone seems to disagree on how to define Artificial General Intelligence. Fast Company. ^ Nosta, John (5 January 2024). The Accelerating Path to Artificial General Intelligence. Psychology Today. Retrieved 30 March 2024. ^ Hickey, Alex. Whole Brain Emulation: A Huge Step for Neuroscience. Tech Brew. Retrieved 8 November 2023. ^ Sandberg & Boström 2008. ^ Drachman 2005. ^ a b Russell & Norvig 2003. ^ Moravec 1988, p. 61. ^ Moravec 1998. ^ Holmgaard Mersh, Amalie (15 September 2023). Decade-long European research project maps the human brain. euractiv. ^ Swaminathan, Nikhil (January-February 2011). Glia-the other brain cells. Discover. Archived from the initial on 8 February 2014. Retrieved 24 January 2014. ^ de Vega, Glenberg & Graesser 2008. A wide variety of views in present research study, all of which require grounding to some degree ^ Thornton, Angela (26 June 2023). How uploading our minds to a computer system may become possible. The Conversation. Retrieved 8 November 2023. ^ Searle 1980 ^ For instance: Russell & Norvig 2003, Oxford University Press Dictionary of Psychology Archived 3 December 2007 at the Wayback Machine (estimated in Encyclopedia.com),. MIT Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science Archived 19 July 2008 at the Wayback Machine (quoted in AITopics),. Will Biological Computers Enable Artificially Intelligent Machines to Become Persons? Archived 13 May 2008 at the Wayback Machine Anthony Tongen.


^ a b c Russell & Norvig 2003, p. 947. ^ though see Explainable synthetic intelligence for curiosity by the field about why a program behaves the way it does. ^ Chalmers, David J. (9 August 2023). Could a Big Language Model Be Conscious?. Boston Review. ^ Seth, Anil. Consciousness. New Scientist. Retrieved 5 September 2024. ^ Nagel 1974. ^ The Google engineer who thinks the company's AI has come to life. The Washington Post. 11 June 2022. Retrieved 12 June 2023. ^ Kateman, Brian (24 July 2023). AI Should Be Terrified of Humans. TIME. Retrieved 5 September 2024. ^ Nosta, John (18 December 2023). Should Expert System Have Rights?. Psychology Today. Retrieved 5 September 2024. ^ Akst, Daniel (10 April 2023). Should Robots With Expert System Have Moral or Legal Rights?. The Wall Street Journal. ^ Artificial General Intelligence - Do [es] the cost outweigh benefits?. 23 August 2021. Retrieved 7 June 2023. ^ How we can Benefit from Advancing Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) - Unite.AI. www.unite.ai. 7 April 2020. Retrieved 7 June 2023. ^ a b c Talty, Jules; Julien, Stephan. What Will Our Society Look Like When Artificial Intelligence Is Everywhere?. Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved 7 June 2023. ^ a b Stevenson, Matt (8 October 2015). Answers to Stephen Hawking's AMA are Here!. Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 8 June 2023. ^ a b Bostrom, Nick (2017 ). § Preferred order of arrival. Superintelligence: paths, threats, strategies (Reprinted with corrections 2017 ed.). Oxford, United Kingdom; New York, New York, USA: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2. ^ Piper, Kelsey (19 November 2018). How technological progress is making it likelier than ever that human beings will damage ourselves. Vox. Retrieved 8 June 2023. ^ Doherty, Ben (17 May 2018). Climate alter an 'existential security threat' to Australia, Senate query says. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 16 July 2023. ^ MacAskill, William (2022 ). What we owe the future. New York, NY: Basic Books. ISBN 978-1-5416-1862-6. ^ a b Ord, Toby (2020 ). Chapter 5: Future Risks, Unaligned Expert System. The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-5266-0021-9. ^ Al-Sibai, Noor (13 February 2022). OpenAI Chief Scientist Says Advanced AI May Already Be Conscious. Futurism. Retrieved 24 December 2023. ^ Samuelsson, Paul Conrad (2019 ). Artificial Consciousness: Our Greatest Ethical Challenge. Philosophy Now. Retrieved 23 December 2023. ^ Kateman, Brian (24 July 2023). AI Should Be Terrified of Humans. TIME. Retrieved 23 December 2023. ^ Roose, Kevin (30 May 2023). A.I. Poses 'Risk of Extinction,' Industry Leaders Warn. The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 24 December 2023. ^ a b Statement on AI Risk. Center for AI Safety. 30 May 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023. ^ Stephen Hawking: 'Transcendence looks at the ramifications of expert system - but are we taking AI seriously enough?'. The Independent (UK). Archived from the initial on 25 September 2015. Retrieved 3 December 2014. ^ Herger, Mario. The Gorilla Problem - Enterprise Garage. Retrieved 7 June 2023. ^ The interesting Facebook debate in between Yann LeCun, Stuart Russel and Yoshua Bengio about the threats of strong AI. The remarkable Facebook argument in between Yann LeCun, Stuart Russel and Yoshua Bengio about the threats of strong AI (in French). Retrieved 8 June 2023. ^ Will Artificial Intelligence Doom The Human Race Within The Next 100 Years?. HuffPost. 22 August 2014. Retrieved 8 June 2023. ^ Sotala, Kaj; Yampolskiy, Roman V. (19 December 2014). Responses to catastrophic AGI risk: a study. Physica Scripta. 90 (1 ): 018001. doi:10.1088/ 0031-8949/90/ 1/018001. ISSN 0031-8949. ^ Bostrom, Nick (2014 ). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (First ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-1996-7811-2. ^ Chow, Andrew R.; Perrigo, Billy (16 February 2023). The AI Arms Race Is On. Start Worrying. TIME. Retrieved 24 December 2023. ^ Tetlow, Gemma (12 January 2017). AI arms race dangers spiralling out of control, report alerts. Financial Times. Archived from the initial on 11 April 2022. Retrieved 24 December 2023. ^ Milmo, Dan; Stacey, Kiran (25 September 2023). Experts disagree over danger presented but synthetic intelligence can not be disregarded. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 24 December 2023. ^ Humanity, Security & AI, Oh My! (with Ian Bremmer & Shuman Ghosemajumder). CAFE. 20 July 2023. Retrieved 15 September 2023. ^ Hamblin, James (9 May 2014). But What Would the End of Humanity Mean for Me?. The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 4 June 2014. Retrieved 12 December 2015. ^ Titcomb, James (30 October 2023). Big Tech is stiring fears over AI, caution researchers. The Telegraph. Retrieved 7 December 2023. ^ Davidson, John (30 October 2023). Google Brain creator says huge tech is lying about AI termination danger. Australian Financial Review. Archived from the initial on 7 December 2023. Retrieved 7 December 2023. ^ Eloundou, Tyna; Manning, Sam; Mishkin, Pamela; Rock, Daniel (17 March 2023). GPTs are GPTs: An early look at the labor market effect potential of big language designs. OpenAI. Retrieved 7 June 2023. ^ a b Hurst, Luke (23 March 2023). OpenAI says 80% of employees could see their jobs affected by AI. These are the jobs most impacted. euronews. Retrieved 8 June 2023. ^ Sheffey, Ayelet (20 August 2021). Elon Musk states we require universal standard earnings because 'in the future, manual labor will be a choice'. Business Insider. Archived from the original on 9 July 2023. Retrieved 8 June 2023. Sources

UNESCO Science Report: the Race Against Time for Smarter Development. Paris: UNESCO. 11 June 2021. ISBN 978-9-2310-0450-6. Archived from the original on 18 June 2022. Retrieved 22 September 2021. Chalmers, David (1996 ), The Conscious Mind, Oxford University Press. Clocksin, William (August 2003), Expert system and the future, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, vol. 361, no. 1809, pp. 1721-1748, Bibcode:2003 RSPTA.361.1721 C, doi:10.1098/ rsta.2003.1232, PMID 12952683, S2CID 31032007. Crevier, Daniel (1993 ). AI: The Tumultuous Search for Artificial Intelligence. New York City, NY: BasicBooks. ISBN 0-465-02997-3. Darrach, Brad (20 November 1970), Meet Shakey, the First Electronic Person, Life Magazine, pp. 58-68. Drachman, D. (2005 ), Do we have brain to spare?, Neurology, 64 (12 ): 2004-2005, doi:10.1212/ 01. WNL.0000166914.38327. BB, PMID 15985565, S2CID 38482114. Feigenbaum, Edward A.; McCorduck, Pamela (1983 ), The Fifth Generation: Artificial Intelligence and Japan's Computer Challenge to the World, Michael Joseph, ISBN 978-0-7181-2401-4. Goertzel, Ben; Pennachin, Cassio, eds. (2006 ), Artificial General Intelligence (PDF), Springer, ISBN 978-3-5402-3733-4, archived from the original (PDF) on 20 March 2013. Goertzel, Ben (December 2007), Human-level artificial general intelligence and the possibility of a technological singularity: a reaction to Ray Kurzweil's The Singularity Is Near, and McDermott's review of Kurzweil, Expert system, vol. 171, no. 18, Special Review Issue, pp. 1161-1173, doi:10.1016/ j.artint.2007.10.011, archived from the initial on 7 January 2016, retrieved 1 April 2009. Gubrud, Mark (November 1997), Nanotechnology and International Security, Fifth Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology, archived from the initial on 29 May 2011, retrieved 7 May 2011. Howe, J. (November 1994), Artificial Intelligence at Edinburgh University: a Perspective, archived from the initial on 17 August 2007, obtained 30 August 2007. Johnson, Mark (1987 ), The body in the mind, Chicago, ISBN 978-0-2264-0317-5. Kurzweil, Ray (2005 ), The Singularity is Near, Viking Press. Lighthill, Professor Sir James (1973 ), Expert System: A General Survey, Expert System: a paper seminar, Science Research Council. Luger, George; Stubblefield, William (2004 ), Expert System: Structures and Strategies for Complex Problem Solving (fifth ed.), The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc., p. 720, ISBN 978-0-8053-4780-7. McCarthy, John (2007b). What is Expert system?. Stanford University. The ultimate effort is to make computer programs that can resolve issues and accomplish goals worldwide in addition to human beings. Moravec, Hans (1988 ), Mind Children, Harvard University Press Moravec, Hans (1998 ), When will computer system hardware match the human brain?, Journal of Evolution and Technology, vol. 1, archived from the initial on 15 June 2006, recovered 23 June 2006 Nagel (1974 ), What Is it Like to Be a Bat (PDF), Philosophical Review, 83 (4 ): 435-50, doi:10.2307/ 2183914, JSTOR 2183914, archived (PDF) from the initial on 16 October 2011, recovered 7 November 2009 Newell, Allen; Simon, H. A. (1976 ). Computer Science as Empirical Inquiry: Symbols and Search. Communications of the ACM. 19 (3 ): 113-126. doi:10.1145/ 360018.360022. Nilsson, Nils (1998 ), Artificial Intelligence: A New Synthesis, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, ISBN 978-1-5586-0467-4 NRC (1999 ), Developments in Expert System, Funding a Transformation: Government Support for Computing Research, National Academy Press, archived from the original on 12 January 2008, recovered 29 September 2007 Poole, David; Mackworth, Alan; Goebel, Randy (1998 ), Computational Intelligence: A Rational Approach, New York: Oxford University Press, archived from the initial on 25 July 2009, retrieved 6 December 2007 Russell, Stuart J.; Norvig, Peter (2003 ), Expert System: A Modern Approach (2nd ed.), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-790395-2 Sandberg, Anders; Boström, Nick (2008 ), Whole Brain Emulation: A Roadmap (PDF), Technical Report # 2008-3, Future of Humanity Institute, Oxford University, archived (PDF) from the initial on 25 March 2020, recovered 5 April 2009 Searle, John (1980 ), Minds, Brains and Programs (PDF), Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3 (3 ): 417-457, doi:10.1017/ S0140525X00005756, S2CID 55303721, archived (PDF) from the original on 17 March 2019, recovered 3 September 2020 Simon, H. A. (1965 ), The Shape of Automation for Men and Management, New York City: Harper & Row Turing, Alan (October 1950). Computing Machinery and Intelligence. Mind. 59 (236 ): 433-460. doi:10.1093/ mind/LIX.236.433. ISSN 1460-2113. JSTOR 2251299. S2CID 14636783.
de Vega, Manuel; Glenberg, Arthur; Graesser, Arthur, eds. (2008 ), Symbols and Embodiment: Debates on meaning and cognition, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-1992-1727-4 Wang, Pei; Goertzel, Ben (2007 ). Introduction: Aspects of Artificial General Intelligence. Advances in Artificial General Intelligence: Concepts, Architectures and Algorithms: Proceedings of the AGI Workshop 2006. IOS Press. pp. 1-16. ISBN 978-1-5860-3758-1. Archived from the original on 18 February 2021. Retrieved 13 December 2020 - by means of ResearchGate.
Further reading

Aleksander, Igor (1996 ), Impossible Minds, World Scientific Publishing Company, ISBN 978-1-8609-4036-1 Azevedo FA, Carvalho LR, Grinberg LT, Farfel J, et al. (April 2009), Equal varieties of neuronal and nonneuronal cells make the human brain an isometrically scaled-up primate brain, The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 513 (5 ): 532-541, doi:10.1002/ cne.21974, PMID 19226510, S2CID 5200449, archived from the initial on 18 February 2021, retrieved 4 September 2013 - through ResearchGate Berglas, Anthony (January 2012) [2008], Expert System Will Kill Our Grandchildren (Singularity), archived from the initial on 23 July 2014, retrieved 31 August 2012 Cukier, Kenneth, Ready for Robots? How to Consider the Future of AI, Foreign Affairs, vol. 98, no. 4 (July/August 2019), pp. 192-98. George Dyson, historian of computing, writes (in what may be called Dyson's Law) that Any system easy adequate to be understandable will not be complicated enough to behave smartly, while any system made complex enough to behave intelligently will be too complicated to understand. (p. 197.) Computer researcher Alex Pentland writes: Current AI machine-learning algorithms are, at their core, dead basic stupid. They work, however they work by brute force. (p. 198.). Gelernter, David, Dream-logic, the Internet and Artificial Thought, Edge, archived from the original on 26 July 2010, recovered 25 July 2010. Gleick, James, The Fate of Free Choice (review of Kevin J. Mitchell, Free Agents: How Evolution Gave Us Free Will, Princeton University Press, 2023, 333 pp.), The New York Review of Books, vol. LXXI, no. 1 (18 January 2024), pp. 27-28, 30. Agency is what differentiates us from machines. For biological creatures, reason and purpose originate 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.). Halal, William E. TechCast Article Series: The Automation of Thought (PDF). Archived from the initial (PDF) on 6 June 2013. - Halpern, Sue, The Coming Tech Autocracy (evaluation of Verity Harding, AI Needs You: How We Can Change AI's Future and Save Our Own, Princeton University Press, 274 pp.; Gary Marcus, Taming Silicon Valley: How We Can Ensure That AI Works for Us, MIT Press, 235 pp.; Daniela Rus and Gregory Mone, The Mind's Mirror: Risk and Reward in the Age of AI, Norton, 280 pp.; Madhumita Murgia, Code Dependent: Residing In the Shadow of AI, Henry Holt, 311 pp.), The New York Review of Books, vol. LXXI, no. 17 (7 November 2024), pp. 44-46. ' We can't reasonably anticipate that those who intend to get rich from AI are going to have the interests of the rest people close at heart,' ... writes [Gary Marcus] 'We can't count on federal governments driven by campaign finance contributions [from tech business] to push back.' ... Marcus details the needs that people ought to make from their federal governments and the tech companies. They consist of transparency on how AI systems work; compensation for people if their data [are] used to train LLMs (large language design) s and the right to grant this use; and the ability to hold tech companies responsible for the harms they cause by getting rid of Section 230, imposing cash penalites, and passing stricter product liability laws ... Marcus likewise suggests ... that a brand-new, AI-specific federal agency, similar to the FDA, the FCC, or the FTC, might supply the most robust oversight ... [T] he Fordham law professor Chinmayi Sharma ... suggests ... establish [ing] a professional licensing regime for engineers that would work in a similar way to medical licenses, malpractice matches, and the Hippocratic oath in medicine. 'What if, like doctors,' she asks ..., 'AI engineers likewise swore to do no harm?' (p. 46.). Holte, R. C.; Choueiry, B. Y. (2003 ), Abstraction and reformulation in synthetic intelligence, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, vol. 358, no. 1435, pp. 1197-1204, doi:10.1098/ rstb.2003.1317, PMC 1693218, PMID 12903653. Hughes-Castleberry, Kenna, A Murder Mystery Puzzle: The literary puzzle Cain's Jawbone, which has stumped people for years, reveals the constraints of natural-language-processing algorithms, Scientific American, vol. 329, no. 4 (November 2023), pp. 81-82. This murder mystery competitors has actually revealed that although NLP (natural-language processing) models are capable of unbelievable tasks, their capabilities are really much limited by the quantity of context they receive. This [...] might trigger [difficulties] for bbarlock.com scientists who intend to utilize them to do things such as analyze ancient languages. In some cases, there are few historic 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 create phony videos equivalent from real ones. Just how much does it matter?, The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 54-59. If by 'deepfakes' we indicate sensible videos produced utilizing expert system that actually deceive individuals, then they barely exist. The fakes aren't deep, and the deeps aren't phony. [...] A.I.-generated videos are not, in general, operating in our media as counterfeited evidence. Their role better looks like that of animations, specifically smutty ones. (p. 59.). - Leffer, Lauren, The Risks of Trusting AI: We should prevent humanizing machine-learning designs utilized in scientific research study, Scientific American, vol. 330, no. 6 (June 2024), pp. 80-81. Lepore, Jill, The Chit-Chatbot: Is talking with a device a conversation?, The New Yorker, 7 October 2024, pp. 12-16. Marcus, Gary, Artificial Confidence: Even the newest, buzziest systems of synthetic basic intelligence are stymmied by the exact same old issues, Scientific American, vol. 327, no. 4 (October 2022), pp. 42-45. McCarthy, John (October 2007), From here to human-level AI, Artificial Intelligence, 171 (18 ): 1174-1182, doi:10.1016/ j.artint.2007.10.009. McCorduck, Pamela (2004 ), Machines Who Think (2nd ed.), Natick, Massachusetts: A. K. Peters, ISBN 1-5688-1205-1. Moravec, Hans (1976 ), The Role of Raw Power in Intelligence, archived from the initial on 3 March 2016, retrieved 29 September 2007. Newell, Allen; Simon, H. A. (1963 ), GPS: A Program that Simulates Human Thought, in Feigenbaum, E. A.; Feldman, J. (eds.), Computers and Thought, New York City: McGraw-Hill. Omohundro, Steve (2008 ), The Nature of Self-Improving Expert system, provided and distributed at the 2007 Singularity Summit, San Francisco, California. Press, Eyal, In Front of Their Faces: Does facial-recognition innovation lead police to disregard contradictory evidence?, The New Yorker, 20 November 2023, pp. 20-26. Roivainen, Eka, AI's IQ: ChatGPT aced a [standard intelligence] test however showed that intelligence can not be determined by IQ alone, Scientific American, vol. 329, no. 1 (July/August 2023), p. 7. Despite its high IQ, ChatGPT fails at jobs that need real humanlike thinking or an understanding of the physical and social world ... ChatGPT appeared unable to reason logically and tried to rely on its huge database of ... realities stemmed from online texts. - Scharre, Paul, Killer Apps: The Real Dangers of an AI Arms Race, Foreign Affairs, vol. 98, no. 3 (May/June 2019), pp. 135-44. Today's AI innovations are effective however undependable. Rules-based systems can not deal with their developers did not expect. Learning systems are restricted by the information on which they were trained. AI failures have already resulted in tragedy. Advanced auto-pilot features in cars and trucks, although they perform well in some circumstances, have driven vehicles without cautioning into trucks, concrete barriers, and parked cars. In the incorrect situation, AI systems go from supersmart to superdumb in an immediate. When an opponent is trying to control and hack an AI system, the risks are even greater. (p. 140.). Sutherland, J. G. (1990 ), Holographic Model of Memory, Learning, and Expression, International Journal of Neural Systems, vol. 1-3, pp. 256-267. - Vincent, James, Horny Robot Baby Voice: James Vincent on AI chatbots, London Review of Books, vol. 46, no. 19 (10 October 2024), pp. 29-32. [AI chatbot] programs are enabled by new technologies but count on the timelelss human propensity to anthropomorphise. (p. 29.). Williams, R. W.; Herrup, K.