Amodei said it seems very likely that there is room for smarter-than-human AI systems to do a better job than humans at the epidemiological modeling used in disease eradication campaigns.
Unresolvable The public record could not settle it.
Prediction: Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
Reasoning
A vague statement that there is 'room' for AI to do better, with no horizon or defined metric.
Cite this claim
Dario Amodei, “Amodei said it seems very likely that there is room for smarter-than-human AI systems to do a better job than humans at the epidemiological modeling used in disease eradication campaigns.” (said 17 August 2015). Verdict: unresolvable. Reliability API, claim c_577f3a11e140, method 0.1.0+c876030c, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_577f3a11e140
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More prediction claims by Dario Amodei
-
Mostly false
“We believe AI for biology is on a similar exponential trend.”
-
Resolved true
“for coding, we're going to see very serious things by the end of 2025,”
By the end of 2025, AI will do very serious things in coding.
-
Resolved false
“But I would guess that in another 10 months, we’ll probably get pretty close. We’ll be at least 90%.”
-
Mostly false
“in 10 months we’ve gone from 3% to 50% on this task. And I think in another year we’ll probably be at 90%.”
-
Mostly true
“I would guess a year from now, the models can do this very, very reliably.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.