• huginn@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago
    1. Not consistently and not across truly logical tests. They abjectly fail at abstract reasoning. They do well only in very specific cases.
    2. IQ is an objectively awful measure of human intelligence. Why would it be useful for artificial intelligence?
    3. For these tests that are so centered around specific facts: of course a model that has had the entirety of the Internet encoded into it has the answers. The shocking thing is that the model is so lossy that it doesn’t ace the test.
    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      IQ correlates with a good number of things though. It’a not perfect but it’s not meaningless either.

      • huginn@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        And global warming correlates with the decline in piracy rates. IQ is a garbage statistic invented by early 20th century eugenicists to prove that white people were the best.

        You can’t boil down the nuance of the most complex object in the known universe to a single number.

        • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not perfectly you can’t. But similarly to how people’s SAT scores predict their future success, IQ tests in aggregate do have predictive power.

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      IQ is objectively a good measure of human intelligence. High IQ people have higher educational achievement, income, etc.