In some tasks, AI is unreliable. In others, it is superhuman. You could, of course, say the same thing about calculators, but it is also clear that AI is different. It is already demonstrating general capabilities and performing a wide range of intellectual tasks, including those that it is not specifically trained on. Does that mean that o3 and Gemini 2.5 are AGI? Given the definitional problems, I really don’t know, but I do think they can be credibly seen as a form of “Jagged AGI” - superhuman in enough areas to result in real changes to how we work and live, but also unreliable enough that human expertise is often needed to figure out where AI works and where it doesn’t.
— Ethan Mollick, On Jagged AGI
Recent articles
- Tips on prompting ChatGPT for UK technology secretary Peter Kyle - 3rd June 2025
- How often do LLMs snitch? Recreating Theo's SnitchBench with LLM - 31st May 2025
- Talking AI and jobs with Natasha Zouves for News Nation - 30th May 2025