Since intelligence isn't a well-defined term, the default fall-back would be a measurement by proxy.

Humans are usually tasked with solving an IQ-test as the most common proxy.

A human level AI could do just the same. If the AI scores above 50 points, it can be considered human level (though literally retarded).

The measure of intelligence, François Chollet

https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.01547

Thanks for the interesting read! It was a bit tiresome (a 38 page history lesson, followed by a 5 page introduction and only about 5 pages of actual content), but very informative nonetheless.

The proposed method is very hard to distinguish from a traditional IQ test (or a subset thereof) and the first to parts (~38 pages) basically serve as a justification for this.

In the end the author admits that the proposed method lacks test diversity, has no established validity and has no way of qualifying results.

The essay just stops where it gets interesting (i.e. at the point where the actual science starts), which left me a bit disappointed in the end t.b.h.

It's a great summary of the history and development of the field and the methodologies used therein.

It's in no way a solution to measuring and quantifying general intelligence, though.

I think the only measure that makes sense is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it

ironically being able to do that is a key aspect of intelligence .