PreprintCited by 93Psychiatry, Mental Health, NeuroscienceArtificial Intelligence ApplicationsMachine Learning and Algorithms

AI-GAs: AI-generating algorithms, an alternate paradigm for producing general artificial intelligence

Open access
Clune, Jeff·2019·arXiv

Abstract

Perhaps the most ambitious scientific quest in human history is the creation of general artificial intelligence, which roughly means AI that is as smart or smarter than humans. The dominant approach in the machine learning community is to attempt to discover each of the pieces required for intelligence, with the implicit assumption that some future group will complete the Herculean task of figuring out how to combine all of those pieces into a complex thinking machine. I call this the "manual AI approach". This paper describes another exciting path that ultimately may be more successful at producing general AI. It is based on the clear trend in machine learning that hand-designed solutions eventually are replaced by more effective, learned solutions. The idea is to create an AI-generating algorithm (AI-GA), which automatically learns how to produce general AI. Three Pillars are essential for the approach: (1) meta-learning architectures, (2) meta-learning the learning algorithms themselves, and (3) generating effective learning environments. I argue that either approach could produce general AI first, and both are scientifically worthwhile irrespective of which is the fastest path. Because both are promising, yet the ML community is currently committed to the manual approach, I argue that our community should increase its research investment in the AI-GA approach. To encourage such research, I describe promising work in each of the Three Pillars. I also discuss AI-GA-specific safety and ethical considerations. Because it it may be the fastest path to general AI and because it is inherently scientifically interesting to understand the conditions in which a simple algorithm can produce general AI (as happened on Earth where Darwinian evolution produced human intelligence), I argue that the pursuit of AI-GAs should be considered a new grand challenge of computer science research.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1905.10985

Cites

180 of 180 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The proposed ADAS introduces a novel area in AI-GA research.

    “The proposed Automated Design of Agentic Systems (ADAS) introduces a novel area in AI-GA research, potentially accelerating the development of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) beyond current manual approaches (Clune, 2019).”

    From Automated Design of Agentic Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Clune, 2019

  • The history of machine learning reveals a recurring theme: manually created artifacts become replaced by learned, more efficient solutions over time as we get more compute and data.

    “However, the history of machine learning reveals a recurring theme: manually created artifacts become replaced by learned, more efficient solutions (Clune, 2019) over time as we get more compute and data (Sutton, 2019).”

    From Automated Design of Agentic Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Clune, 2019

  • Self-improving AI systems' continued development appears inevitable.

    “Furthermore, as self-improving AI systems become prominent (Clune, 2019; Fernando et al., 2024; Lu et al., 2024a; Zelikman et al., 2022), their continued development appears inevitable.”

    From Automated Design of Agentic Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Clune, 2019

  • Any advancement that increases the autonomous capabilities of AI systems introduces its own set of safety considerations, especially for systems that improve in an open-ended way.

    “Any advancement that increases the autonomous capabilities of AI systems introduces its own set of safety considerations (Bengio et al., 2024), especially for systems that improve in an open-ended way (Ecoffet et al., 2020; Clune, 2019).”

    From Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Clune, 2019

  • Manually crafted artifacts are often replaced by learnable and optimizable ones.

    “manually crafted artifacts are often replaced by learnable and optimizable ones”

    From EvoFlow: Evolving Diverse Agentic Workflows On The Fly (2025) · cites this paper as Clune, 2019

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

9 of the 189 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clune, J.
Affiliations
University of Wyoming (US)
Corresponding author
Clune, Jeff
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2946004135
Cited by
82
References
189
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Science Foundation (CAREER, 1453549)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Psychiatry, Mental Health, Neuroscience
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
Keywords
artificial general intelligence, meta-learning, AI safety, AI ethics, evolution of intelligence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review