[bashfulpup]

I looked at the website and have no idea how Arc is supposed to be AGI.

Can someone explain?

[TheDudeMan]

It is necessary but not sufficient.

If you can't do ARC, you aren't general enough. But even if you can do ARC, you still might not be general enough.

[Workaccount2]

It's also possible that you are an AGI and simply cannot pass ARC.

[TheDudeMan]

How so? If there is a task that humans can do but the AI cannot, I would not call it AGI. But that's just my definition.

[awwaiid]

Yeah but if my brother can't pass it, that doesn't mean he is NOT human.

[Jensson]

Could he pass it if he was educated to do the task from birth? Human level intelligence includes being able to be educated, the ML models we have done so far can't be educated so have to match the level of educated humans to compare.

General intelligence as we know it requires ability to receive education.

[TheDudeMan]

I said AGI. I did not say human.

[infgeoax]

Isn't chatGPT already proven to be smarter than many of us in many ways?

[biophysboy]

Its not a test of AGI. It tests whether you possess innate human capacities: rudimentary arithmetic & geometry, etc. Most of the problems were created manually. The original paper states that they limited the test to innate human priors to make the scope well-defined.