<p>I agree with @1muflon1's comment that this is quite broad, because AGI can be defined in many different ways. For instance, do we consider <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/its-called-artificial-intelligence-but-what-is-intelligence/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">simple learning tasks</a> as AGI or metacognition?</p>
<p>This is a <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3070741" rel="nofollow noreferrer">brief survey</a> of AGI startups, but another point to keep in mind is that few startups/firms are actually gunning for AGI because we generally have problems in other, &quot;easier&quot; subfields of machine learning. For example, there are still difficulties with reinforcement learning for robotics or few-shot learning, both of which are much more specific tasks than AGI.</p>
<p>In sum, it's hard to provide good estimates because 1) the sum of money is likely to be small and 2) AGI is often defined broadly and used more in pop culture than by technical researchers.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-17T12:53:21.747Z
Thanks for the paper, definitely worth reading even though it does not answer my question. Apparently DeepMind is worth $500 million, which is not that small.
Winston
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-18T20:49:29.870Z
I think whats important to note though is that Deepmind really is not AGI - it's foundational AI, which some consider separate. AGI really is considered far off, and I'm not sure how to characterize it to people outside of technical backgrounds
C. Kang
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-18T20:50:32.853Z
Like, I don't think any researcher really expects AGI to emerge even within the next 10 to 20 years - people have said a 50/50 chance by 2040-60 in this [article](https://research.aimultiple.com/artificial-general-intelligence-singularity-timing/#:~:text=Based%20on%20survey%20results%2C%20experts,expect%20it%20in%2074%20years.)
C. Kang
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T17:17:17.200Z
2020-09-16T17:17:17.200Z
C. Kang
<p>Glossary: Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is the name given to an upcoming technology that would be able to solve all sorts of problems, like a human, and unlike more specialized existing artificial intelligence (AI). In a sense, AGI is closer to depiction of AI in movies and in the public's mind.</p>
<p>Originally my question was about valuation but I was told this is not allowed here. So I am only asking about existing investments in artificial general intelligence.</p>
<p>Company or VC names are optional.</p>
<p>The main point is to get more information about artificial general intelligence economics.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:12:29.887Z
This is too opinion based. One can say for sure that if this technology is provided at competitive markets it will generate returns that roughly correspond to its marginal product as that can be said generally about any capital investment. What those returns will be in concrete terms is pure speculation.
1muflon1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:15:24.497Z
What about current investments? Are not they based on potential returns?
Winston
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:23:23.323Z
they are for sure based on expected returns but observed returns will rarely if ever correspond to expected returns and sometimes that is even impossible. For example, consider investment where with 50% investing 100e yields 150e and another 50% where it yields only the original 100e back. So expected amount of money you get back is 125e and expected return 25% but note in reality it’s not even possible to actually get return 25% in reality the ex post return can be only either 0% or 50%. This aside if your question were not opinion based it would be too broad in my opinion
1muflon1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:31:22.017Z
I understand this is opinion based, but I could say the same of a question like "is it worth buying apple shares?" or "how the smartphone market is envisioned to evolve during the next months?". Yet, people are paid to answer those questions. They study the market and based on what they find, ie. based on the best of their knowledge they give an opinion. I am asking for an educated opinion, if you will, not a magical number. Is that prohibited? Should I limit my question to current investments only?
Winston
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:35:43.813Z
Oh but I am not saying that its not worth while question. Sure answering such question can be worth while and there might be people paid to do that but on stack exchange such questions are of topic. In fact market commentary is of topic too here (see link below). So while asking whether you should buy apple stock might be an interesting question it is simply not suitable question for this site, thats all. Every stack has rules about what is on topic and what is off topic . https://economics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2018/is-financial-market-commentary-off-topic
1muflon1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:36:44.927Z
Okay got it. So I will ask about current investments only.
Winston
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:37:36.483Z
but you should also address the too broad issue, because that is another rule we have here. Maybe have a look at our FAQ about on topic questions https://economics.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask
1muflon1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:37:41.960Z
True AI was 10 years in the future when I started programming, 40 years ago. It still is.
simon at rcl
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:43:10.260Z
@1muflon1: too broad to ask about how much is invested in a field? This sounds quite abusive now.
Winston
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:47:03.570Z
@Exocytosis I am not trying to be abusive but AI/ or general AI is not just one field. I doubt there exists any statistics just for general investment in all general AI. If that’s so then making a summary of all investments industry by industry would be too broad. Also note I am just trying to help you because I have some experience here seeing which questions get closed and which not. Please feel free to disregard my advice if you think it’s abusive or does not fit you, you need 5 close votes to be closed so maybe other users won’t share my view, but I think it would be too broad.
1muflon1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T13:53:59.220Z
I was just reacting, do not take it personally. Also I do read what you write and I did change my question. I am just astonished this would be considered too broad. I do not think it is broader than asking about investments in software or smartphones. Yet there are numbers for these sectors. Also I would be very surprised if current artificial general intelligence investments are that massive.
Winston
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-16T19:39:30.153Z
I’m voting to close this question because it is better suited here https://ai.stackexchange.com/questions/23620/how-much-is-currently-invested-in-artificial-general-intelligence-research-and-d
Bayesian
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-17T12:44:35.967Z
How is that better suited?
Winston
<value><technology>
How much is currently invested in artificial general intelligence research and development?
Winston
# How much is currently invested in artificial general intelligence research and development?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-09-16)

Glossary: Artificial general intelligence (AGI) is the name given to an upcoming technology that would be able to solve all sorts of problems, like a human, and unlike more specialized existing artificial intelligence (AI). In a sense, AGI is closer to depiction of AI in movies and in the public's mind.

Originally my question was about valuation but I was told this is not allowed here. So I am only asking about existing investments in artificial general intelligence.

Company or VC names are optional.

The main point is to get more information about artificial general intelligence economics.

**Tags:** value, technology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: This is too opinion based. One can say for sure that if this technology is provided at competitive markets it will generate returns that roughly correspond to its marginal product as that can be said generally about any capital investment. What those returns will be in concrete terms is pure speculation.  
> **username_0**: What about current investments? Are not they based on potential returns?  
> **username_1**: they are for sure based on expected returns but observed returns will rarely if ever correspond to expected returns and sometimes that is even impossible. For example, consider investment where with 50% investing 100e yields 150e and another 50% where it yields only the original 100e back. So expected amount of money you get back is 125e and expected return 25% but note in reality it’s not even possible to actually get return 25% in reality the ex post return can be only either 0% or 50%. This aside if your question were not opinion based it would be too broad in my opinion  
> **username_0**: I understand this is opinion based, but I could say the same of a question like "is it worth buying apple shares?" or "how the smartphone market is envisioned to evolve during the next months?". Yet, people are paid to answer those questions. They study the market and based on what they find, ie. based on the best of their knowledge they give an opinion. I am asking for an educated opinion, if you will, not a magical number. Is that prohibited? Should I limit my question to current investments only?  
> **username_1**: Oh but I am not saying that its not worth while question. Sure answering such question can be worth while and there might be people paid to do that but on stack exchange such questions are of topic. In fact market commentary is of topic too here (see link below). So while asking whether you should buy apple stock might be an interesting question it is simply not suitable question for this site, thats all. Every stack has rules about what is on topic and what is off topic . https://economics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2018/is-financial-market-commentary-off-topic  
> **username_0**: Okay got it. So I will ask about current investments only.  
> **username_1**: but you should also address the too broad issue, because that is another rule we have here. Maybe have a look at our FAQ about on topic questions https://economics.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask  
> **username_2**: True AI was 10 years in the future when I started programming, 40 years ago. It still is.  
> **username_0**: @username_1: too broad to ask about how much is invested in a field? This sounds quite abusive now.  
> **username_1**: @Exocytosis I am not trying to be abusive but AI/ or general AI is not just one field. I doubt there exists any statistics just for general investment in all general AI. If that’s so then making a summary of all investments industry by industry would be too broad. Also note I am just trying to help you because I have some experience here seeing which questions get closed and which not. Please feel free to disregard my advice if you think it’s abusive or does not fit you, you need 5 close votes to be closed so maybe other users won’t share my view, but I think it would be too broad.  
> **username_0**: I was just reacting, do not take it personally. Also I do read what you write and I did change my question. I am just astonished this would be considered too broad. I do not think it is broader than asking about investments in software or smartphones. Yet there are numbers for these sectors. Also I would be very surprised if current artificial general intelligence investments are that massive.  
> **username_3**: I’m voting to close this question because it is better suited here https://ai.stackexchange.com/questions/23620/how-much-is-currently-invested-in-artificial-general-intelligence-research-and-d  
> **username_0**: How is that better suited?  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2020-09-16. Score: 1

I agree with @username_1's comment that this is quite broad, because AGI can be defined in many different ways. For instance, do we consider [simple learning tasks](https://www.wired.com/story/its-called-artificial-intelligence-but-what-is-intelligence/) as AGI or metacognition?

This is a [brief survey](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3070741) of AGI startups, but another point to keep in mind is that few startups/firms are actually gunning for AGI because we generally have problems in other, "easier" subfields of machine learning. For example, there are still difficulties with reinforcement learning for robotics or few-shot learning, both of which are much more specific tasks than AGI.

In sum, it's hard to provide good estimates because 1) the sum of money is likely to be small and 2) AGI is often defined broadly and used more in pop culture than by technical researchers.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks for the paper, definitely worth reading even though it does not answer my question. Apparently DeepMind is worth $500 million, which is not that small.  
> **username_4**: I think whats important to note though is that Deepmind really is not AGI - it's foundational AI, which some consider separate. AGI really is considered far off, and I'm not sure how to characterize it to people outside of technical backgrounds  
> **username_4**: Like, I don't think any researcher really expects AGI to emerge even within the next 10 to 20 years - people have said a 50/50 chance by 2040-60 in this [article](https://research.aimultiple.com/artificial-general-intelligence-singularity-timing/#:~:text=Based%20on%20survey%20results%2C%20experts,expect%20it%20in%2074%20years.)  

---

