News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

jatinkk

That is definitely the industry's hope—that quantity eventually becomes quality (emergence). But my concern comes from the history of the model itself. In psychology, Guilford’s "cube" of 150 specialized factors never emerged into a unified intelligence. It just remained a complex list of separate abilities. The "open question" you mention (how to handle tasks outside the training distribution) is exactly where I think the Guilford architecture hits a wall. If we build by adding specific modules, the system might never learn how to reason through the "unknown"—it just waits for a new module to be added.

AGI is marketed as Spearman's 'g', but architected like Guilford's model

I am not a tech expert and not working in the tech industry, so this is an outsider's perspective. The marketing around AGI promises Spearman’s g: a general, fluid intelligence that can adapt to new, unseen problems. But the engineering—specifically "Mixture of Experts" and distinct modules—looks exactly like J.P. Guilford’s Structure of Intellect. Guilford viewed intelligence as a collection...

( Read More... | 2 comments | 3 points | on HN )