Minimum Viable Intelligence


Yann LeCun hates the term “Artificial General Intelligence” because, after all, what human capabilities are actually considered general? He prefers “Human Level Intelligence” and I tend to agree that this is a better threshold. I continue to be intrigued at what such a threshold for HLAI will look like.

Think of the range of “intelligence” of humans you interact with. Is the least capable human you know a good enough bar for HLAI? This isn't simply a thought exercise.

It's easy to explain why any particular human might consistently underperform any given task. Lack of education, opportunity, etc... yet they remain human, arguably with the ability to perform somewhere near the mean. Does this discount humans with disabilities as being possible minimum thresholds? That seems like a dangerous idea.

Unfortunately this variability in performance, not capacity, keeps the threshold for proof of “intelligence” very fuzzy. I reference here something I state often:

To the outside observer there is no functional difference between the ability and desire to act.

Given the above, we're still left holding the bag on the question: “What is the minimum viable intelligence that proves a system is Human Level?”