[cubefox]

He only says this because otherwise he would have to say that

- OpenAI's o3 counts as "AGI" when it did unexpectedly beat the ARC-AGI benchmark or

- Explicitly admit that he was wrong when assuming that ARC-AGI would test for AGI

[sweezyjeezy]

FWIW the original ARC was published in 2019, just after GPT-2 but a while before GPT-3. I work in the field, I think that discussing AGI seriously is actually kind of a recent thing (I'm not sure I ever heard the term 'AGI' until a few years ago). I'm not saying I know he didn't feel that, but he doesn't talk in such terms in the original paper.

[cubefox]

> We argue that ARC can be used to measure a human-like form of general fluid intelligence and that it enables fair general intelligence comparisons between AI systems and humans.

https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.01547

[davidclark]

> It is important to note that ARC is a work in progress, not a definitive solution; it does not fit all of the requirements listed in II.3.2, and it features a number of key weaknesses…

Page 53

> The study of general artificial intelligence is a field still in its infancy, and we do not wish to convey the impression that we have provided a definitive solution to the problem of characterizing and measuring the intelligence held by an AI system.

Page 56

[Davidzheng]

It's in the OpenAI charter...