arXiv:2503.04742cs.CYcs.AI2025-03AAAI被引 2

反对通用AI,主张非人类智能应专业化以提升可靠性与安全性

A Case for Specialisation in Non-Human Entities

  • 从人类劳动类比出发,论证非人类智能更需专业分工
  • 提出四点支持专业化依据:模型鲁棒性、安全、社会文化演化等
  • 强调对复杂系统需制定明确规范,弥补机器学习与工程安全的差距

随着大型多模态AI模型的发展,特别是大语言模型(LLMs)的兴起,人工通用智能(AGI)已从边缘概念演变为主流大模型研发的核心目标。然而,本文主张转向专业化路径,回顾通用性的潜在缺陷,并强调专用系统在工业实践中的价值。贡献有三方面:第一,分析普遍反对专业化的论点,指出其在人类劳动中的适用性反而支持非人类代理(如算法或组织)的专业化;第二,提出四个支持专业化的理由,涵盖机器学习鲁棒性、计算机安全、社会科学及文化演化;第三,倡导“指定”(specification)理念,批评当前机器学习在安全工程与形式化验证方面落后于软件开发实践,并探讨新兴良好实践如何缩小这一差距,尤其强调对难以规范的系统需建立明确治理机制。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

With the rise of large multi-modal AI models, fuelled by recent interest in large language models (LLMs), the notion of artificial general intelligence (AGI) went from being restricted to a fringe community, to dominate mainstream large AI development programs. In contrast, in this paper, we make a case for specialisation, by reviewing the pitfalls of generality and stressing the industrial value of specialised systems. Our contribution is threefold. First, we review the most widely accepted arguments against specialisation, and discuss how their relevance in the context of human labour is actually an argument for specialisation in the case of non human agents, be they algorithms or human organisations. Second, we propose four arguments in favor of specialisation, ranging from machine learning robustness, to computer security, social sciences and cultural evolution. Third, we finally make a case for specification, discuss how the machine learning approach to AI has so far failed to catch up with good practices from safety-engineering and formal verification of software, and discuss how some emerging good practices in machine learning help reduce this gap. In particular, we justify the need for specified governance for hard-to-specify systems.

AI治理专业化系统安全机器学习

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。