This seems generally correct and important—great work identifying and issue and deciding to try to work on it!
As XKCD points out, adding definitions increases the number, instead of replacing existing definitions. Given that, the partial list has lots of things that are not (quite) ready to be operationalized or are not decidable, and they are nearly duplicative of other definitions that aren’t being referenced or compared.
This seems generally correct and important—great work identifying and issue and deciding to try to work on it!
As XKCD points out, adding definitions increases the number, instead of replacing existing definitions. Given that, the partial list has lots of things that are not (quite) ready to be operationalized or are not decidable, and they are nearly duplicative of other definitions that aren’t being referenced or compared.
The most helpful thing would now be to spend more time to go through the current definitions and tests, and catalogue them. A few you’re missing, off the top of my head:
- Ross Gruetzemacher’s definitions—Transformative AI, versus Radically transformative AI—
HLMI for job replacement, based on this—https://www.openphilanthropy.org/blog/some-background-our-views-regarding-advanced-artificial-intelligence#Sec1
- The various definitions from here: https://parallel-forecast.github.io/AI-dict/ (where I’ve noted that lots are ambiguous, etc.) And I’d be happy if you wanted to add to that / include more things in the list there.