✳flâneur — a map of the web's best reading
How should we evaluate progress in AI? | Better without AI
betterwithout.ai · 7,435 words · saved by 1 readers
Improving artificial intelligence research with scientific testing, design practice, and meta-rational choice of methods and criteria
Wolpertinger image courtesy Rainer Zenz The evaluation question is inseparable from questions about what sort of thing AI is—and both are inseparable from questions about how best to do it. Most intellectual disciplines have standard, unquestioned criteria for what counts as progress. Artificial intelligence is an exception. It has always borrowed criteria, approaches, and specific methods from at least six fields: 1. Science 2. Engineering 3. Mathematics 4. Philosophy 5. Design 6. Spectacle This has always caused trouble. The diverse evaluation criteria are incommensurable. They suggest diver
Explore this link on the map →related reading
- 2023 letter | Zhengdongzhengdongwang.com
- AI as Normal Technology | Knight First Amendment Instituteknightcolumbia.org
- Toward a Critical Technical Practicepages.gseis.ucla.edu
- Sporadicamichaelnotebook.com
- Intentionally Designing the Future of AIgoodfire.ai
- [1911.01547] On the Measure of Intelligencearxiv.org
- Designing AI for Disruptive Scienceasimov.press
- [2603.26524] Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AIarxiv.org
- Are AI benchmarks doomed? - by Anson Ho and Greg Burnhamepochai.substack.com
- A Pragmatic Vision for Interpretability — AI Alignment Forumalignmentforum.org
- AI Safety Seems Hard to Measurecold-takes.com
- AI’s capabilities may be exaggerated by flawed tests, study saysnbcnews.com