ArticleHeliyon2024
The limit of human intelligence.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 1998, Fields medallist Stephen Smale [Smale (1998) [1]] proposed his famous eighteen problems to the mathematicians of this century. The statement of his eighteenth problem is simple but very important. The statement of his problem is, "What are the limits of intelligence, both artificial and human?". To answer the limit of human intelligence, in this paper, we introduce cognitive-consequence space and cognitive-consequence topology, and mainly prove that deductive and non-deductive parts of a human mind will never be empty. It proves a human being will continue to think and solve problems using both deductive and non-deductive inferences as long as they are alive. Hence, we conclude that human intelligence is limitless. We also introduce cognitive closure, cognitive similarity distance, cognitive limit point, cognitive-continuous function, consequence ideal, consequence filter, Gödel's incompleteness black hole, and study related properties. We also provide suitable justifications to show that cognitive consequence topological space is not similar to that of any existing topological space because it connects cognitive space and consequence operator in one frame to find the limit of human intelligence. Moreover, we also provide justifications to state that artificial intelligence has limitations. Thus, we conclude that human intelligence will always remain superior to artificial intelligence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.