This model doesn’t seem to lead to good predictions, though: Dota 2 is a lot more complicated than Go and chess, and yet we have superhuman performance there. Or how complicated exactly does a task need to be before ANNs and brains are equally good?
My model predicts superhuman AGI in general—just that it uses and scales predictably with compute.
Dota 2 is only marginally more complicated than go/chess; the world model is still very very simple as it can be simulated perfectly using just a low end cpu core.
Or how complicated exactly does a task need to be before ANNs and brains are equally good?
Driving cars would be a good start. In terms of game worlds there is probably nothing remotely close, would need to be obviously 3D and very open ended with extremely complex physics and detailed realistic graphics, populated with humans and or advanced AI (I’ve been out of games for a while and i’m not sure what that game currently would be, but probably doesn’t exist yet).
My model predicts superhuman AGI in general—just that it uses and scales predictably with compute.
Dota 2 is only marginally more complicated than go/chess; the world model is still very very simple as it can be simulated perfectly using just a low end cpu core.
Driving cars would be a good start. In terms of game worlds there is probably nothing remotely close, would need to be obviously 3D and very open ended with extremely complex physics and detailed realistic graphics, populated with humans and or advanced AI (I’ve been out of games for a while and i’m not sure what that game currently would be, but probably doesn’t exist yet).