mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Evidence of interrelated cognitive-like capabilities in large language models: Indications of artificial general intelligence or achievement?

arXiv 2310.11616 ↗First posted 17 Oct 2023cs.CL cs.AIcited by 27

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems that can perform a variety of tasks commonly found in human intelligence tests, such as defining words, performing calculations, and engaging in verbal reasoning. There are also substantial individual differences in LLM capacities. Given the consistent observation of a positive manifold and general intelligence factor in human samples, along with group-level factors (e.g., crystallized intelligence), we hypothesized that LLM test scores may also exhibit positive intercorrelations, which could potentially give rise to an artificial general ability (AGA) factor and one or more group-level factors. Based on a sample of 591 LLMs and scores from 12 tests aligned with fluid reasoning (Gf), domain-specific knowledge (Gkn), reading/writing (Grw), and quantitative knowledge (Gq), we found strong empirical evidence for a positive manifold and a general factor of ability. Additionally, we identified a combined Gkn/Grw group-level factor. Finally, the number of LLM parameters correlated positively with both general factor of ability and Gkn/Grw factor scores, although the effects showed diminishing returns. We interpreted our results to suggest that LLMs, like human cognitive abilities, may share a common underlying efficiency in processing information and solving problems, though whether LLMs manifest primarily achievement/expertise rather than intelligence remains to be determined. Finally, while models with greater numbers of parameters exhibit greater general cognitive-like abilities, akin to the connection between greater neuronal density and human general intelligence, other characteristics must also be involved.

Key facts. Cited by 27 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 91 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Oct 2023.

Builds on

14 of 91 references.

References · 14

  1. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
  2. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  3. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,100
  4. 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 3,019
  5. 2023A Survey of Large Language Modelscited by 2,576
  6. 2023PaLM 2 Technical Reportcited by 1,162
  7. 2023MathPrompter: Mathematical Reasoning using Large Language Modelscited by 236
  8. 2023How Abilities in Large Language Models are Affected by Supervised Fine-tuning Data Compositioncited by 223
  9. 2019WinoGrande: An Adversarial Winograd Schema Challenge at Scalecited by 204
  10. 2023How well do Large Language Models perform in Arithmetic tasks?cited by 130
  11. 2015A Primer on Neural Network Models for Natural Language Processingcited by 76
  12. 2022Limitations of Language Models in Arithmetic and Symbolic Inductioncited by 71
2 more
  1. 2021Model Complexity of Deep Learning: A Surveycited by 65
  2. 2019Metrology for AI: From Benchmarks to Instrumentscited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 4; 2025: 7; 2026: 15.

27 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2024Observational Scaling Laws and the Predictability of Language Model Performancecited by 130
  2. 2025Measuring what Matters: Construct Validity in Large Language Model Benchmarkscited by 119
  3. 2023Evaluating General-Purpose AI with Psychometricscited by 23
  4. 2025Scales++: Compute Efficient Evaluation Subset Selection with Cognitive Scales Embeddingscited by 11
  5. 2024Collaborative Performance Prediction for Large Language Modelscited by 9
  6. 2025From Benchmarks to Skills: Low-Rank Factors for LLM Evaluationcited by 9
  7. 2024The Cognitive Capabilities of Generative AI: A Comparative Analysis with Human Benchmarkscited by 6
  8. 2026A Neuropsychologically Grounded Evaluation of LLM Cognitive Abilitiescited by 5
  9. 2026Deployment Decision Reliability: A Generalizability-Theory Framework for Sizing Long-Horizon Agent Evaluationscited by 4
  10. 2025Automated Capability Evaluation of Foundation Modelscited by 3
  11. 2026Beyond Divergent Creativity: A Human-Based Evaluation of Creativity in Large Language Modelscited by 3
  12. 2026You Don't Need to Run Every Evalcited by 3
15 more
  1. 2025Position: AI Evaluations Should be Grounded on a Theory of Capabilitycited by 2
  2. 2026Cost-Efficient Estimation of General Abilities Across Benchmarkscited by 2
  3. 2026The Rise and Fall of G in AGIcited by 2
  4. 2026Evaluating Cognitive Age Alignment in Interactive AI Agentscited by 2
  5. 2024Project MPG: towards a generalized performance benchmark for LLM capabilitiescited by 1
  6. 2026Pressure Reveals Character: Behavioural Alignment Evaluation at Depthcited by 1
  7. 2026Dynamic LLM Routers are Often Misguidedcited by 1
  8. 2025On the Measure of a Model: From Intelligence to Generalitycited by 0
  9. 2025Foundations of Artificial Intelligence Frameworks: Notion and Limits of AGIcited by 0
  10. 2026An Interpretable and Scalable Framework for Evaluating Large Language Modelscited by 0
  11. 2026The Metanym Game: An LLM Benchmark Without Ground Truth That Rises With the Models It Measurescited by 0
  12. 2026Will Scaling Improve Social Simulation with LLMs?cited by 0
  13. 2026CogArena: A Multimethod Evaluation of Cognitive Ability Structure in Large Language Modelscited by 0
  14. 2026When benchmark inferences do not compose: Projectibility in AI evaluationcited by 0
  15. 2026One Capability or Many? Structural and Predictive Tests of Benchmark Validity Disagree About Economic Benchmarks for Frontier AIcited by 0