Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Understanding and Benchmarking Artificial Intelligence: OpenAI's o3 Is Not AGI

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2501.07458 v1 pith:OQKPMNF6 submitted 2025-01-13 cs.AI cs.PF

classification cs.AIcs.PF
keywords intelligencearc-agibenchmarkoperationspredefinedartificialcannotdiverse
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

OpenAI's o3 achieves a high score of 87.5 % on ARC-AGI, a benchmark proposed to measure intelligence. This raises the question whether systems based on Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly o3, demonstrate intelligence and progress towards artificial general intelligence (AGI). Building on the distinction between skills and intelligence made by Fran\c{c}ois Chollet, the creator of ARC-AGI, a new understanding of intelligence is introduced: an agent is the more intelligent, the more efficiently it can achieve the more diverse goals in the more diverse worlds with the less knowledge. An analysis of the ARC-AGI benchmark shows that its tasks represent a very specific type of problem that can be solved by massive trialling of combinations of predefined operations. This method is also applied by o3, achieving its high score through the extensive use of computing power. However, for most problems in the physical world and in the human domain, solutions cannot be tested in advance and predefined operations are not available. Consequently, massive trialling of predefined operations, as o3 does, cannot be a basis for AGI - instead, new approaches are required that can reliably solve a wide variety of problems without existing skills. To support this development, a new benchmark for intelligence is outlined that covers a much higher diversity of unknown tasks to be solved, thus enabling a comprehensive assessment of intelligence and of progress towards AGI.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. GIFARC: Synthetic Dataset for Leveraging Human-Intuitive Analogies to Elevate AI Reasoning

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The authors build a pipeline that converts GIFs into ARC-style puzzles with analogy labels and executable solutions, and report small in-context experiments suggesting the analogy labels shift an LLM's stated reasoning style.

  2. A Conceptual Framework for AI Capability Evaluations

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A descriptive conceptual framework with seven elements (target, task, subject, inputs, instance, measurement, result analysis) for systematizing analysis of AI capability evaluations.

Pith tools