There is vital importance in reaching agreement on what artificial general intelligence (AGI) is so ... [+] that we'll know when we get there.gettyIn todays column, I take a close look at Sam Altmans latest indication of what artificial general intelligence (AGI) is going to consist of. His recent missive in his online blog has been generally overlooked by the media as to the magnitude or significance of what he had to say. Given that he is widely perceived as a bellwether of AI progress and attainment, his pointed remarks about AGI are worthy of due attention. You see, all manner of stakeholders associated with AI and even society as a whole are going to be tremendously impacted by the attainment of AGI -- so we ought to be looking carefully at the expected destination.Lets talk about it.This analysis of an innovative AI breakthrough is part of my ongoing Forbes column coverage on the latest in AI including identifying and explaining various impactful AI complexities (see the link here).Aspirations Of Achieving AGIBefore we dive deep into the AGI topic, Id like to say something about cheese.You might be familiar with the now-classic line entailing the spirited question about who moved the cheese. This catchphrase was popularized because of a book published in 1998 entitled Who Moved My Cheese? An Amazing Way to Deal with Change in Your Work and in Your Life by Spencer Johnson. The catchy notion launched society into a sense of introspection about the nature of goals and seeking the attainment of those goals.In brief, if you think of a mouse trying to find a morsel of cheese hidden in a maze, the idea is that people do likewise at work and even at home. The cheese in this metaphor can be considered a goal. If someone moves the cheese, you could say they are moving the goal. A worker in a company is presumably driven to reach a goal set for them by the firm. When the firm changes the goal, a worker ought to adjust accordingly. Sometimes, people do not adjust and continue to strive toward the outdated or expunged goal, but just like the aspect of cheese thats been moved from its earlier spot, mindlessly doing so is not going to be particularly fruitful.The gist that I want to highlight involves the nature of goals and the moving of goals.How does that relate to AGI?Easy-peasy, heres the deal.The definition of AGI or artificial general intelligence will determine what direction the world will go towards attaining AGI. If AGI is stipulated as blue with polka dots, AI makers will mightily strive to make their wares such that they imbue blue and have polka dots. Upon reaching that vaunted goal, they will vociferously proclaim they have achieved AGI. Yay, good for them.The thing is, perhaps the definition of AGI wasnt on target to begin with. Maybe AGI would be better defined as orange with big stripes. Meanwhile, because the prevailing goal was blue with polka dots, thats where all the mice were heading, even though this isnt where the cheese truly is.You might be wondering why there would be any doubt about what constitutes AGI. I would wager that most people naturally assume that the AI community has completely nailed down the precise ins and outs of what AGI is going to be.Well, sorry to say, I would ask you to sit down since the surprising twist is that there isnt any commonly agreed across-the-board fully accepted definition of AGI. AI makers can concoct any definition of AGI that they want to. The same with AI researchers. Just about anyone who wants to speculate or stipulate about the end-game nature of AGI can do so.That makes for a messy situation.Slipperiness Of AI, AGI, ASII recently laid out the shifting sands or ambiguous boundaries amid the use of the terms artificial intelligence (AI), artificial general intelligence (AGI), and artificial superintelligence (ASI) at the link here. Let me bring you up to speed quickly since it is entirely relevant here. Ill focus on AI and AGI for the sake of brevity in this discussion.The field of AI initially got underway by coining and utilizing the AI moniker, which seemed satisfactory at the time. A general notion was that AI could be defined as a machine or computer-based system that exhibits human intelligence and thus represents an artificial form of intelligence.Gradually, the AI moniker got watered down and it chaotically referred to everything from a simple piece of software to the latest fastest servers. Another interleaving factor was that expert systems or knowledge-based systems gained popularity and were typically very narrow in their use of a kind of artificial intelligence.The AI community decided that perhaps a new way of depicting the vaunted or end-game style of AI was needed. They had grown weary of the AI as being anything including the proverbial kitchen sink. Instead, those advancing AI would aim for artificial general intelligence. AGI would be the topmost AI and would not only be narrow, such as the advent of expert systems, it would also need to be general, as in being able to exhibit the fuller general aspects of intelligence too.Here, I will set aside the AI moniker and proceed to focus mainly on the AGI moniker. If you are nonetheless keenly interested in the AI moniker, you might enjoy my analysis of the legal definitions associated with AI as used in the latest laws, regulations, and legal contracts, see my coverage at the link here.Pinning Down AGI I would bet you are waiting with bated breath to see what AGI is defined as. Im certainly glad you asked.Lets concentrate on three definitions. One of them was recently posted by Sam Alman, CEO of OpenAI, while another one is firmly implanted in the official OpenAI business charter, and then a third is a working definition that I devised and have been routinely using in my columns.Here they are:Altman AGI definition AGI is defined as a system that can tackle increasingly complex problems, at human level, in many fields.OpenAI AGI definition: AGI is defined as highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable workEliot AGI definition: AGI is defined as an AI system that exhibits intelligent behavior of both a narrow and general manner on par with that of humans, in all respects.Mull over those AGI definitions and then proceed so that we can cogently unpack them.Ill examine the third one, then the second one, and finally the first one. That order will make sense shortly.Tighter And More Uplifting AGI DefinitionThe third one in the bulleted list would objectively be a firmer or tighter definition for AGI in terms of stretching as far as we can go toward the topmost of AI (well, excluding ASI, which I noted earlier I wasnt going to drag into this discussion).Trying to attain this conceptualization of AGI is going to be a big ask:AGI or artificial general intelligence is an AI system that exhibits intelligent behavior of both a narrow and general manner on par with that of humans, in all respects.This is tough to achieve because it explicitly says that there must be both narrow and general intelligence exhibited, which must be on par with that of human intelligence and do so in all respects of what humans can do. You cant cheat this definition by coming up with a really good AI-based chess-playing program and then brazenly claiming it is AGI. It wouldnt qualify as AGI unless it could do all other intelligence aspects that humans can do.Keep this in mind as we explore the other two AGI definitions.Looser Definition Of AGIThe second AGI definition is one that has been posted for quite a while on the official OpenAI company website and is shown on the OpenAI Charter statement webpage. Heres the exact statement: OpenAIs mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence (AGI)by which we mean highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable workbenefits all of humanity.I opted to extract the core portion and stated their definition this way:AGI is defined as highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable workLets read between the lines on this AGI definition.A crucial element of their notion of AGI is that it only has to entail the so-called most economically valuable work which is a mouthful. There are various ways to interpret this condition. Mostly, it seems to suggest that AGI only has to be considered as AGI if it is good enough to replace human labor in some unspecified industries and some unspecified economic output basis.Another loosey-goosey aspect is that AGI entails highly autonomous systems which presumably is different than saying fully autonomous systems. There is a big difference there. A highly autonomous system could presumably still be semi-autonomous and not be fully autonomous, see my detailed explanation of those differences at the link here.I think it is fair and reasonable to assert that this AGI is a lot less of a vaunted or revered AGI than the definition I gave in the third bullet.Why does that matter?Because hitting this so-called AGI as an end goal is a lot less demanding than trying to achieve the one that Ive stated in the third bullet. The requirements are watered down. Now, so the trolls dont go berserk, I am not saying that achieving this AGI isnt still challenging. It is. Absolutely so. Im just pointing out that it is not as challenging as the greater aspiration and, in some eyes, would be a letdown in comparison to where we ought to be going.It would be something akin to having a truly outstretched goal of wanting to reach the moon but settling instead of getting within some spitting distance of the moon. It just isnt the same aspiration.Openly Wider AGI DefinitionIn a posting entitled Three Observations by Sam Altman on February 10, 2025, on his blog, he provided a definition of AGI that said this: AGI is a weakly defined term, but generally speaking we mean it to be a system that can tackle increasingly complex problems, at human level, in many fields. Observe that he did acknowledge rightfully in his statement that AGI is a weakly defined term, meaning that the definition of AGI is all over the map and we dont have a pristine all-approved version.I extracted the core portion of his AGI definition and provided this above in the first of the three bullet points:AGI is defined as a system that can tackle increasingly complex problems, at human level, in many fields.What do you think of that AGI definition?Well, I doubt there would be much argumentation that it is even looser than any of the other two definitions that Ive so far covered here. The loosey-goosey is quite pervasive in this version. What do increasingly complex problems consist of? When referring to many fields the obvious question is which fields and how many are enough or sufficient for an alleged AGI to be heralded as AGI?There is enough room in that AGI definition to drive a Mack truck through it.As an aside, you might vaguely be aware that there is a lot of rumbling in the AI industry about the OpenAI and Microsoft contractual conditions as to their arrangement and when the arrangement will materially change if AGI is reached by OpenAI (see my analysis at the link here). Lots of speculation exists and numerous guesses have been reported widely. In any case, I only bring this up as an aside due to the footnote that Sam Altman included in his blog post, which said this: By using the term AGI here, we aim to communicate clearly, and we do not intend to alter or interpret the definitions and processes that define our relationship with Microsoft. We fully expect to be partnered with Microsoft for the long term. He then commented a bit further in the footnote, seemingly staving off potential legal gyrations. Just thought any AI insiders might get a kick out of that bacon-saving footnote.Putting This All TogetherLets get to the brass tacks.If an AI system is devised by some AI maker that can proficiently solve increasingly complex problems at a human level and do so in many fields, but not in all fields, and not for all manner of complex problems that humans could potentially solve, would you be willing to exclaim to the high heavens that we have finally and victoriously achieved AGI?Give that a moment of quiet reflection.For me, though I would be darned happy and excited at such a grand accomplishment, it just still doesnt seem to match with any going-to-the-moon aspirational AGI.What will society as a whole think of any emboldened claims that we have reached AGI if the definition of that nature is considered the goal post? I think you can also see how it makes any predictions about the attainment of AGI in the near term a much more likely proposition. Why? Because it is a lesser version of what a revered AGI would consist of. Naturally, it is going to be likely sooner reachable.In a sense, the goalposts seem to have been moved closer to the kicker, making those extra-point kicks easier and sooner to achieve. The cheese has been moved. The mice wont have to be quite as clever to find the cheese. Again, you still must give due credit to the mice for finding any cheese. Thats a big win unto itself.All this talk about cheese reminds me that the moon is supposedly made of cheese (a longtime medieval fable says so). Anyway, we can use a moonshot as yet another metaphor here.Suppose I said to you that a goal was to step on the moon. Before 1969, that was a nearly unimaginable goal. It was a tremendous ask. What if during the mid-1960s, the goal was adjusted to say that we want to land on the moon? Landing is different than stepping onto the moon. You could seemingly send an unmanned rocket that lands on the moon and proclaim you had succeeded in achieving the mission or goal.Just not the same vibe.I vote that we stick with the higher goal. In fact, the next level would be to say that we ought to live on the moon. That would be taking the stepping on the moon to a heightened aspiration. In my view, that is essentially what ASI is about, but Ill cover that in another upcoming column.Right now, we need to seriously and strenuously decide where at least the AGI cheese resides.