paint-brush
Surveying the Evolution and Future Trajectory of Generative AI - Analysis on Research Taxonomyby@disburse

Surveying the Evolution and Future Trajectory of Generative AI - Analysis on Research Taxonomy

by DisburseOctober 27th, 2024
Read on Terminal Reader
Read this story w/o Javascript
tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

This paper surveys the evolution of generative AI, highlighting innovations in MoE, multimodality, and AGI while addressing ethical and research challenges.
featured image - Surveying the Evolution and Future Trajectory of Generative AI - Analysis on Research Taxonomy
Disburse HackerNoon profile picture

Authors:

(1) Timothy R. McIntosh;

(2) Teo Susnjak;

(3) Tong Liu;

(4) Paul Watters;

(5) Malka N. Halgamuge.

Abstract and Introduction

Background: Evolution of Generative AI

The Current Generative AI Research Taxonomy

Innovative Horizon of MOE

Speculated Capabilities of Q*

Projected Capabilities of AGI

Impact Analysis on Generative AI Research Taxonomy

Emergent Research Priorities in Generative AI

Practical Implications and Limitations of Generative AI Technologies

Impact of Generative AI on Preprints Across Disciplines

Conclusions, Disclaimer, and References

VII. IMPACT ANALYSIS ON GENERATIVE AI RESEARCH TAXONOMY

With the advent of advanced AI developments such as MoE, multimodality, and AGI, the landscape of Generative AI research is undergoing a significant transformation. This section analyzes how these developments are reshaping the research taxonomy in generative AI.


A. Criteria for Impact Analysis


The continuously evolving landscape of Generative AI, which instigates transformative changes across various research domains, necessitates a systematic evaluation of these advancements’ influence, for which we have established a set of criteria detailed in Table II, serving as analytical lenses to quantify and categorize the impact, deeply rooted in the dynamic interplay between technological progress and the evolving paradigms of research focus areas. Our analysis framework has been constructed on a gradient scale ranging from emergent to obsolete, reflecting the extent to which areas of Generative AI research are being reshaped. The categorization into five distinct classes allows for a complex assessment, acknowledging that not all areas will be uniformly affected. This multi-tiered approach is informed by historical patterns of technological disruption and the adaptability of scientific inquiry.


At the apex of our evaluative hierarchy, ‘Emerging Direction’ encapsulates the advent of uncharted research vistas, propelled by ongoing AI breakthroughs, which is predicated not on conjecture, but on a historical continuum of AI evolution, where each surge in technological power unfurls new


Table II: Criteria for Analyzing Impact on Generative AI Research


scientific enigmas and avenues [315], [316]. ‘Areas Requiring Redirection’ denote research spheres that, though established, find themselves at an inflection point, necessitating a strategic pivot to assimilate emergent AI paradigms and an overhaul of traditional methodologies, akin to the transition from rulebased expert systems to adaptive machine learning frameworks [315], [317]. The ‘Still Relevant’ classification affirms the tenacity of select research domains that, by addressing persistent scientific inquiries or through their inherent malleability, remain impervious to the tides of AI innovation [317]. In contrast, domains categorized as ‘Likely to Become Redundant’ confront potential obsolescence, inviting strategic foresight and resource reallocation to forestall scientific stagnation [318]. Lastly, ‘Inherently Unresolvable’ challenges serve as a sobering reminder of the perpetual dilemmas within AI research that defy resolution, rooted in the complex web of human ethics and cultural diversity, thus anchoring the pursuit of AI within the intractable tapestry of human values and societal imperatives [319], [320].


B. Overview of Impact Analysis


This subsection offers a detailed overview of the impact analysis carried out on the research taxonomy within the realm of generative AI, with a specific focus on recent progress in MoE, multimodality, and AGI, aiming to evaluate the impact of these innovative developments on various facets of generative AI research, ranging from model architecture to sophisticated learning methodologies, and includes both quantitative and qualitative assessments across a multitude of domains and subdomains in LLM research, shedding light on the extent to which each area is influenced by these technological advancements. This evaluation considered factors such as the emergence of new research directions, the necessity for redirection in existing research areas, the continued relevance of certain methodologies, and the potential redundancy of others, and has encapsulated in Table III.


  1. Impact On Model Architecture: Transformer Models have been scored with a redirection requirement (֒→) of 4 in both MoE and AGI, and a relevance (↔) of 3 in multimodality, leading to an overall score of 11. These models, forming the backbone of many current AI architectures, continue to be relevant for handling complex input sequences. However, the emergence of MoE and AGI indicates a shift towards more dynamic and specialized architectures. While transformers remain essential, there is a need for them to evolve and integrate with these advanced systems for enhanced performance and adaptability.






Table III: Impact of MoE, Multimodality, and AGI on Generative AI Research









Data Security maintains a consistent relevance (↔) with a score of 3 across MoE, multimodality, and AGI, leading to a total score of 9. The fundamental principles of data security remain crucial despite the advancements in MoE, which may necessitate tailored strategies for its distributed nature. In multimodal AI, the secure handling of diverse data types continues to be of paramount importance. The core tenets of data security are sustained even with the advancement of AGI, though the complexity and scope of security measures are likely to increase.


AI Ethics is marked for redirection (֒→) with a score of 4 in both MoE and multimodality, and faces inherently unresolvable challenges (△) with a score of 1 in AGI, accumulating a total score of 9. The decision-making processes and transparency of MoE models necessitate a reevaluation of ethical considerations. In multimodal AI, ethical concerns, particularly in the interpretation and use of multimodal data, require new approaches. The ethical challenges in AGI are expected to be complex and involve deep philosophical and societal implications that might be difficult to fully resolve.


Privacy Preservation scores a redirection need (֒→) of 4 across MoE, multimodality, and AGI, leading to an overall score of 12. The distributed nature of MoE systems requires a reassessment of privacy preservation techniques to handle data processed by multiple experts. Multimodal AI systems, especially those handling sensitive data such as images and sounds, necessitate tailored privacy strategies. With the extensive data processing capabilities of AGI, advanced and potentially new approaches to privacy preservation are called for.





Aligning AI with human values poses inherently unresolvable challenges (△) in all contexts—MoE, multimodality, and AGI—with a score of 1. This reflects the complexity and diversity of tasks MoE models handle, the integration of various data types in multimodal AI, and the broad range of cognitive abilities encompassed by AGI. These factors contribute to the significant ongoing challenges in aligning AI with human values, resulting in a total score of 3.




The development of AGI necessitates redirection (֒→) in both MoE and multimodality, each with a score of 4, indicating the need for more integrated and complex systems. AGI remains at the forefront of its own field (↔) with a score of 3, with each breakthrough directly influencing its progress. The overall impact score for AGI development is 11.



This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 DEED license.