Scenarios for the Transition to AGI

Anton Korinek, Donghyun Suh · arXiv (Cornell University) · 17 Mar 2024

Where this sits in the debate

Will AI actually boost productivity and growth? · its finding: it depends (why studies differ)
Will AI widen inequality? · its finding: it depends (why studies differ)
How fast will the impact arrive? · its finding: it depends (why studies differ)
Will AI destroy more jobs than it creates? · its finding: it depends (why studies differ)

Direction of the finding as read from the abstract by an AI model (AI-written).

Key takeaway AI-written

In a task-based model where AI automates ever more complex tasks, wages depend on a race between automation and capital accumulation. If task complexity has an unbounded tail, wages can rise indefinitely; if full automation is reached, wages collapse, and they may fall earlier if automation outpaces capital accumulation.

The paper in three steps AI-written

Written by an AI agent from the paper's abstract, which is the primary source and is quoted below.

The question

How might output and wages evolve as technology progresses toward AI that can perform every task humans can?

The approach

A theoretical model in which work is split into tasks of differing complexity, automation reaches ever more complex tasks, and wages depend on a race between automation and capital accumulation.

The findings

If task complexity has a thick unbounded tail, there is always work for humans and wages may keep rising; if human-performable complexity is bounded and full automation arrives, wages collapse. Wages can fall earlier if automation outpaces capital accumulation.

How to read it: theory. A theoretical model — its value is the mechanism it isolates; ask whether the assumptions fit the real economy.

Limitations and counterpoints AI-written

Results are scenario-based and depend on assumed distributions of task complexity, not on estimates from data.

Abstract

We analyze how output and wages behave under different scenarios for technological progress that may culminate in Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), defined as the ability of AI systems to perform all tasks that humans can perform. We assume that human work can be decomposed into atomistic tasks that differ in their complexity. Advances in technology make ever more complex tasks amenable to automation. The effects on wages depend on a race between automation and capital accumulation. If the distribution of task complexity exhibits a sufficiently thick infinite tail, then there is always enough work for humans, and wages may rise forever. By contrast, if the complexity of tasks that humans can perform is bounded and full automation is reached, then wages collapse. But declines may occur even before if large-scale automation outpaces capital accumulation and makes labor too abundant. Automating productivity growth may lead to broad-based gains in the returns to all factors. By contrast, bottlenecks to growth from irreproducible scarce factors may exacerbate the decline in wages.

About this publication

Preprint. A preprint — posted publicly before or without journal peer review; findings may still be revised.

Published: 2024 (31 months ago)
Citations: 1 (OpenAlex)

1 citation recorded by OpenAlex — too few 2024 papers in this collection for a fair comparison.

□ added to this collection in 2026.

Anton Korinek signed the wemustactnow.ai letter — part of why this paper is in the collection.