Artificial Intelligence as Strange Intelligence: Against Linear Models of Intelligence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.04986v1
• Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2026 19:19:36 GMT
• Title: Artificial Intelligence as Strange Intelligence: Against Linear Models of Intelligence
• Authors: Kendra Chilson, Eric Schwitzgebel,
• Abstract summary: We introduce two novel concepts: "familiar intelligence" and "strange intelligence"<n>If AI is strange intelligence, we should expect that even the most capable systems will sometimes fail in seemingly obvious tasks.
• Score: 0.03125141879014581
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: We endorse and expand upon Susan Schneider's critique of the linear model of AI progress and introduce two novel concepts: "familiar intelligence" and "strange intelligence". AI intelligence is likely to be strange intelligence, defying familiar patterns of ability and inability, combining superhuman capacities in some domains with subhuman performance in other domains, and even within domains sometimes combining superhuman insight with surprising errors that few humans would make. We develop and defend a nonlinear model of intelligence on which "general intelligence" is not a unified capacity but instead the ability to achieve a broad range of goals in a broad range of environments, in a manner that defies nonarbitrary reduction to a single linear quantity. We conclude with implications for adversarial testing approaches to evaluating AI capacities. If AI is strange intelligence, we should expect that even the most capable systems will sometimes fail in seemingly obvious tasks. On a nonlinear model of AI intelligence, such errors on their own do not demonstrate a system's lack of outstanding general intelligence. Conversely, excellent performance on one type of task, such as an IQ test, cannot warrant assumptions of broad capacities beyond that task domain.

Related papers

• Evaluating Intelligence via Trial and Error [59.80426744891971]
  We introduce Survival Game as a framework to evaluate intelligence based on the number of failed attempts in a trial-and-error process.<n>When the expectation and variance of failure counts are both finite, it signals the ability to consistently find solutions to new challenges.<n>Our results show that while AI systems achieve the Autonomous Level in simple tasks, they are still far from it in more complex tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T05:59:45Z)
• Imagining and building wise machines: The centrality of AI metacognition [78.76893632793497]
  We examine what is known about human wisdom and sketch a vision of its AI counterpart.<n>We argue that AI systems particularly struggle with metacognition.<n>We discuss how wise AI might be benchmarked, trained, and implemented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T18:10:10Z)
• On the consistent reasoning paradox of intelligence and optimal trust in AI: The power of 'I don't know' [79.69412622010249]
  Consistent reasoning, which lies at the core of human intelligence, is the ability to handle tasks that are equivalent. CRP asserts that consistent reasoning implies fallibility -- in particular, human-like intelligence in AI necessarily comes with human-like fallibility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-05T10:06:53Z)
• AI-as-exploration: Navigating intelligence space [0.05657375260432172]
  I articulate the contours of a rather neglected but central scientific role that AI has to play. The basic thrust of AI-as-exploration is that of creating and studying systems that can reveal candidate building blocks of intelligence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-15T21:06:20Z)
• On a Functional Definition of Intelligence [0.0]
  Without an agreed-upon definition of intelligence, asking "is this system intelligent?"" is an untestable question. Most work on precisely capturing what we mean by "intelligence" has come from the fields of philosophy, psychology, and cognitive science. We present an argument for a purely functional, black-box definition of intelligence, distinct from how that intelligence is actually achieved.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T05:46:49Z)
• Enabling High-Level Machine Reasoning with Cognitive Neuro-Symbolic Systems [67.01132165581667]
  We propose to enable high-level reasoning in AI systems by integrating cognitive architectures with external neuro-symbolic components. We illustrate a hybrid framework centered on ACT-R and we discuss the role of generative models in recent and future applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T21:20:17Z)
• The Generative AI Paradox: "What It Can Create, It May Not Understand" [81.89252713236746]
  Recent wave of generative AI has sparked excitement and concern over potentially superhuman levels of artificial intelligence. At the same time, models still show basic errors in understanding that would not be expected even in non-expert humans. This presents us with an apparent paradox: how do we reconcile seemingly superhuman capabilities with the persistence of errors that few humans would make?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-31T18:07:07Z)
• Suffering Toasters -- A New Self-Awareness Test for AI [0.0]
  We argue that all current intelligence tests are insufficient to point to the existence or lack of intelligence. We propose a new approach to test for artificial self-awareness and outline a possible implementation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-29T18:58:01Z)
• Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
  Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations. It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z)
• Future Trends for Human-AI Collaboration: A Comprehensive Taxonomy of AI/AGI Using Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles [95.58955174499371]
  We describe various aspects of multiple human intelligences and learning styles, which may impact on a variety of AI problem domains. Future AI systems will be able not only to communicate with human users and each other, but also to efficiently exchange knowledge and wisdom.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-07T21:00:13Z)
• Dynamic Cognition Applied to Value Learning in Artificial Intelligence [0.0]
  Several researchers in the area are trying to develop a robust, beneficial, and safe concept of artificial intelligence. It is of utmost importance that artificial intelligent agents have their values aligned with human values. A possible approach to this problem would be to use theoretical models such as SED.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-12T03:58:52Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.