Another thread recently discussed Legg's 2007 definition of intelligence
- i.e.
"Intelligence measures an agent’s ability to achieve goals in a wide
range of environments".
I have never been able to swallow this proposed definition because
I think it leaves out something important, namely: the idea that
intelligence is a psychological attribute.
"Ability to achieve goals" can easily be affected by sensory abilities,
motor abilities and the use of tools to amplify these. However it is
counterintuitive and/or wrong to argue that such things affect
intelligence. If you give someone a hammer does it make them smarter?
Does cutting off their leg make them stupider? I would argue not.
The distinction between sense data, computation and motor outputs is an
important one, I think. Either the concept of "intelligence" should be
divorced from sensory/motor issues, or we need new terminology to refer
to "cognitive ability" - that isn't tied to sensory inputs, motor
outputs or their augmentation.
To illustrate the difference, consider the case of patients with
Locked-in syndrome (LIS). Legg's definition would assign these
very low intelligence. My contrast, I would regard their intelligence
as likely unchanged, but difficult to measure experimentally.
Ref: Universal Intelligence: A Definition of Machine Intelligence
Shane Legg, Marcus Hutter (2007) - https://arxiv.org/abs/0712.3329
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/
------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink:
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T6cada473e1abac06-Mfd5e7d92eac2a714f66be9dc
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
