Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
142 7 A Formal Model of Intelligent Agents
Definition 9 The intellectual breadth of an agent 7, relative to the distribution v over
environments and the distribution y over goals, is
H(XGonq (Hs 951)
where H is the entropy and
V(L)V(G, HK) XConx (Hg, L)
S2 (ta) 1(98; Ho) XCon, (Has 981 Tw)
(He GB -T.)
XConn (u, g; T) =
is the probability distribution formed by normalizing the fuzzy set xcon, (1, 9,T).
A similar definition of the intellectual breadth of a context (y, 9,7), relative to the distri-
bution o over agents, may be posited. A weakness of these definitions is that they don’t try to
account for dependencies between agents or contexts; perhaps more refined formulations may
be developed that account explicitly for these dependencies.
Note that the intellectual breadth of an agent as defined here is largely independent of
the (efficient or not) pragmatic general intelligence of that agent. One could have a rather
(efficiently or not) pragmatically generally intelligent system with little breadth: this would be
a system very good at solving a fair number of hard problems, yet wholly incompetent on a
larger number of hard problems. On the other hand, one could also have a terribly (efficiently or
not) pragmatically generally stupid system with great intellectual breadth: i.e a system roughly
equally dumb in all contexts!
Thus, one can characterize an intelligent agent as “narrow” with respect to distribution v over
environments and the distribution + over goals, based on evaluating it as having low intellectual
breadth. A “narrow AI” relative to v and y would then be an AI agent with a relatively high
efficient pragmatic general intelligence but a relatively low intellectual breadth.
7.5 Conclusion
Our main goal in this chapter has been to push the formal understanding of intelligence in a more
pragmatic direction. Much more work remains to be done, e.g. in specifying the environment,
goal and efficiency distributions relevant to real-world systems, but we believe that the ideas
presented here constitute nontrivial progress.
If the line of research suggested in this chapter succeeds, then eventually, one will be able to
do AGI research as follows: Specify an AGI architecture formally, and then use the mathematics
of general intelligence to derive interesting results about the environments, goals and hardware
platforms relative to which the AGI architecture will display significant pragmatic or efficient
pragmatic general intelligence, and intellectual breadth. The remaining chapters in this section
present further ideas regarding how to work toward this goal. For the time being, such a mode
of AGI research remains mainly for the future, but we have still found the formalism given in
these chapters useful for formulating and clarifying various aspects of the CogPrime design as
will be presented in later chapters.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013058