Difference between revisions of "Statistical analysis of expert timelines argument for AI timelines"
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
The class of experts is variable, which means this argument produces multiple estimates depending on the class of experts used (e.g. "AI researchers attending X conference", "AI researchers in general", "AI safety researchers"). | The class of experts is variable, which means this argument produces multiple estimates depending on the class of experts used (e.g. "AI researchers attending X conference", "AI researchers in general", "AI safety researchers"). | ||
| + | |||
| + | The [[AI Impacts]] paper from 2016 is the best example of this. | ||
[[Category:AI safety]] | [[Category:AI safety]] | ||
[[Category:AI timelines arguments]] | [[Category:AI timelines arguments]] | ||
Latest revision as of 05:10, 9 April 2021
This is a kind of higher-order/meta-level argument that simply performs a statistical analysis of experts' AI timelines to come up with some overall estimate of AI timelines. It punts the question of "but where did the experts get their opinions?" to one or more of the other arguments.
The class of experts is variable, which means this argument produces multiple estimates depending on the class of experts used (e.g. "AI researchers attending X conference", "AI researchers in general", "AI safety researchers").
The AI Impacts paper from 2016 is the best example of this.
