1,569
个编辑
更改
跳到导航
跳到搜索
Moved page from wikipedia:en:Collective intelligence (history)
此词条暂由彩云小译翻译，未经人工整理和审校，带来阅读不便，请见谅。
{{Use dmy dates|date=February 2013}}
[[File:CI types1s 2.jpg|thumb|460px|{{center|Types of collective intelligence}}]]
460px|
460px |
{{Group intelligence}}
{{Recommender systems}}
'''Collective intelligence''' ('''CI''') is shared or group intelligence that [[Emergence|emerges]] from the [[collaboration]], collective efforts, and competition of many individuals and appears in [[consensus decision making]]. The term appears in [[sociobiology]], [[political science]] and in context of mass [[peer review]] and [[crowdsourcing]] applications. It may involve [[consensus]], [[social capital]] and formalisms such as [[voting systems]], [[social media]] and other means of quantifying mass activity. Collective IQ is a measure of collective intelligence, although it is often used interchangeably with the term collective intelligence. Collective intelligence has also been attributed to [[bacteria]]<ref name="Nguyen2011">{{cite book|author=Ngoc Thanh Nguyen|title=Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence III|url=https://books.google.com/?id=RUxv25JFTkkC&pg=PA63|accessdate=11 June 2013|date=25 July 2011|publisher=Springer|isbn=978-3-642-19967-7|page=}}</ref>{{rp|63}} and animals.<ref name="Nguyen2011"/>{{rp|69}}
Collective intelligence (CI) is shared or group intelligence that emerges from the collaboration, collective efforts, and competition of many individuals and appears in consensus decision making. The term appears in sociobiology, political science and in context of mass peer review and crowdsourcing applications. It may involve consensus, social capital and formalisms such as voting systems, social media and other means of quantifying mass activity. Collective IQ is a measure of collective intelligence, although it is often used interchangeably with the term collective intelligence. Collective intelligence has also been attributed to bacteria and animals.
集体智慧(CI)是从许多个体的协作、集体努力和竞争中产生的共享或群体智慧，并出现在共识决策中。这个术语出现在社会生物学、政治科学和大规模同行评议和众包应用的背景下。它可能涉及共识，社会资本和形式主义，如投票系统，社会媒体和其他手段量化大众活动。集体智商是对集体智慧的一种衡量，尽管它经常与集体智慧这个术语互换使用。集体智慧也被归功于细菌和动物。
It can be understood as an [[emergent property]] from the [[synergies]] among: 1) data-[[information]]-knowledge; 2) software-hardware; and 3) experts (those with new insights as well as recognized authorities) that continually learns from feedback to produce just-in-time knowledge for better decisions than these three elements acting alone;<ref>Glenn, Jerome C. Collective Intelligence – One of the Next Big Things, Futura 4/2009, Finnish Society for Futures Studies, Helsinki, Finland</ref> or more narrowly as an emergent property between people and ways of processing information.<ref>Glenn, Jerome C. Chapter 5, 2008 State of the Future. The Millennium Project, Washington, DC 2008</ref> This notion of collective intelligence is referred to as "symbiotic intelligence" by Norman Lee Johnson.<ref>Norman Lee Johnson, [http://CollectiveScience.com Collective Science site]</ref> The concept is used in [[sociology]], [[Prediction market|business]], [[computer science]] and mass communications: it also appears in [[science fiction]]. [[Pierre Lévy]] defines collective intelligence as, "It is a form of universally distributed intelligence, constantly enhanced, coordinated in real time, and resulting in the effective mobilization of skills. I'll add the following indispensable characteristic to this definition: The basis and goal of collective intelligence is mutual recognition and enrichment of individuals rather than the cult of fetishized or [[hypostatized]] communities."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Levy|first=Pierre|url=https://books.google.com/?id=yPNGswEACAAJ|title=Collective Intelligence|date=1999-12-10|publisher=Basic Books|isbn=978-0-7382-0261-7|location=|pages=14|language=en|oclc=249995946}}</ref> According to researchers Pierre Lévy and [[Derrick de Kerckhove]], it refers to capacity of networked [[ICTs]] (Information communication technologies) to enhance the collective pool of social knowledge by simultaneously expanding the extent of human interactions.<ref>Flew, Terry ''New Media: An Introduction''. Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 21</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Lévy|first=Pierre|last2=Farley|first2=Art|last3=Lollini|first3=Massimo|date=2019-12-31|title=Collective Intelligence, the Future of Internet and the IEML: Interview to Pierre Lévy by Art Farley and Massimo Lollini|url=http://journals.oregondigital.org/index.php/hsda/article/view/4620|journal=Humanist Studies & the Digital Age|language=en|volume=6|issue=1|pages=5–31|doi=10.5399/uo/hsda.6.1.2|issn=2158-3846|doi-access=free}}</ref>
It can be understood as an emergent property from the synergies among: 1) data-information-knowledge; 2) software-hardware; and 3) experts (those with new insights as well as recognized authorities) that continually learns from feedback to produce just-in-time knowledge for better decisions than these three elements acting alone; or more narrowly as an emergent property between people and ways of processing information. This notion of collective intelligence is referred to as "symbiotic intelligence" by Norman Lee Johnson. The concept is used in sociology, business, computer science and mass communications: it also appears in science fiction. Pierre Lévy defines collective intelligence as, "It is a form of universally distributed intelligence, constantly enhanced, coordinated in real time, and resulting in the effective mobilization of skills. I'll add the following indispensable characteristic to this definition: The basis and goal of collective intelligence is mutual recognition and enrichment of individuals rather than the cult of fetishized or hypostatized communities." According to researchers Pierre Lévy and Derrick de Kerckhove, it refers to capacity of networked ICTs (Information communication technologies) to enhance the collective pool of social knowledge by simultaneously expanding the extent of human interactions.
它可以被理解为: 1)数据-信息-知识; 2)软件-硬件; 3)专家(那些有新见解和公认权威的人)之间的协同作用产生的一个涌现性质，他们不断地从反馈中学习，以产生及时的知识，从而做出比这三个要素单独作用更好的决定; 或者更狭义地说，是人与信息处理方式之间的一个涌现性质。这种集体智慧的概念被诺曼 · 李 · 约翰逊称为“共生智慧”。这个概念被用于社会学、商业、计算机科学和大众传播: 它也出现在科幻小说中。Pierre l vy 将集体智慧定义为，“它是一种普遍分布的智慧形式，不断增强，实时协调，并导致技能的有效动员。我将在这个定义中增加以下不可或缺的特征: 集体智慧的基础和目标是个人的相互承认和丰富，而不是崇拜或实体化的社区根据研究人员 Pierre l vy 和 Derrick de Kerckhove 的说法，它指的是网络化的信息通信技术(信息通信技术)的能力，通过同时扩大人类互动的范围来加强集体的社会知识库。
Collective intelligence strongly contributes to the shift of knowledge and power from the individual to the collective. According to [[Eric S. Raymond]] (1998) and JC Herz (2005), [[open source]] intelligence will eventually generate superior outcomes to knowledge generated by proprietary software developed within corporations ([[Terry Flew|Flew]] 2008). Media theorist [[Henry Jenkins]] sees collective intelligence as an 'alternative source of media power', related to convergence culture. He draws attention to education and the way people are learning to participate in knowledge cultures outside formal learning settings. Henry Jenkins criticizes schools which promote 'autonomous problem solvers and self-contained learners' while remaining hostile to learning through the means of collective intelligence.<ref>Jenkins, ''Henry Convergence Culture: Where old and new media collide''. New York: New York University Press, 2006, p. 259</ref> Both Pierre Lévy (2007) and Henry Jenkins (2008) support the claim that collective intelligence is important for [[democratization]], as it is interlinked with knowledge-based culture and sustained by collective idea sharing, and thus contributes to a better understanding of diverse society.
Collective intelligence strongly contributes to the shift of knowledge and power from the individual to the collective. According to Eric S. Raymond (1998) and JC Herz (2005), open source intelligence will eventually generate superior outcomes to knowledge generated by proprietary software developed within corporations (Flew 2008). Media theorist Henry Jenkins sees collective intelligence as an 'alternative source of media power', related to convergence culture. He draws attention to education and the way people are learning to participate in knowledge cultures outside formal learning settings. Henry Jenkins criticizes schools which promote 'autonomous problem solvers and self-contained learners' while remaining hostile to learning through the means of collective intelligence. Both Pierre Lévy (2007) and Henry Jenkins (2008) support the claim that collective intelligence is important for democratization, as it is interlinked with knowledge-based culture and sustained by collective idea sharing, and thus contributes to a better understanding of diverse society.
集体智慧有力地促进了知识和权力从个人向集体的转移。根据 Eric s. Raymond (1998)和 JC Herz (2005)的说法，开源智能最终将产生比企业内部开发的专有软件智能产生的知识更好的结果(Flew 2008)。媒体理论家亨利 · 詹金斯认为集体智慧是一种与趋同文化相关的“媒体力量的替代来源”。他提请注意教育和人们学习参与正式学习环境之外的知识文化的方式。亨利•詹金斯批评那些提倡“自主解决问题者和自足型学习者” ，却对通过集体智慧的方式学习持敌对态度的学校。Pierre l vy (2007)和 Henry Jenkins (2008)都支持这样的主张，即集体智慧对民主化很重要，因为它与以知识为基础的文化相互联系，并通过集体思想共享得以维持，从而有助于更好地理解多样化社会。
Similar to the [[G factor (psychometrics)|''g'' factor (''g'')]] for general individual intelligence, a new scientific understanding of collective intelligence aims to extract a general collective intelligence factor '''c factor''' for groups indicating a group's ability to perform a wide range of tasks.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Woolley|first=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|date=2010-10-29|title=Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups|journal=Science|volume=330|issue=6004|pages=686–688|doi=10.1126/science.1193147|pmid=20929725|bibcode=2010Sci...330..686W|url=https://semanticscholar.org/paper/2816dd942e1b2f41c3708c32ccb13e6f24235c72}}</ref> Definition, operationalization and statistical methods are derived from ''g''. Similarly as ''g'' is highly interrelated with the concept of [[Intelligence quotient|IQ]],<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|date=1992|title=Understanding g in terms of information processing|url=|journal=Educational Psychology Review |volume=4 |issue=3|pages=271–308|doi=10.1007/bf01417874|pmid=}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite book|title=The g factor: The science of mental ability.|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|publisher=Praeger|year=1998|isbn=|location=Westport, CT|pages=}}</ref> this measurement of collective intelligence can be interpreted as intelligence quotient for groups (Group-IQ) even though the score is not a quotient per se. Causes for ''c'' and predictive validity are investigated as well.
Similar to the g factor (g) for general individual intelligence, a new scientific understanding of collective intelligence aims to extract a general collective intelligence factor c factor for groups indicating a group's ability to perform a wide range of tasks. Definition, operationalization and statistical methods are derived from g. Similarly as g is highly interrelated with the concept of IQ, this measurement of collective intelligence can be interpreted as intelligence quotient for groups (Group-IQ) even though the score is not a quotient per se. Causes for c and predictive validity are investigated as well.
与一般个人智力的 g 因子(g)类似，对集体智力的新的科学理解旨在为群体提取一般的集体智力因子 c 因子，表明一个群体执行广泛任务的能力。定义，操作主义和统计方法来源于 g 类似于 g 与 IQ 的概念高度相关，这种集体智力的测量可以解释为群体的智商，即使分数本身不是商。此外，还对 c 的原因和预测效度进行了调查。
Collective intelligence is used to help create widely known platforms including [[Google]], Wikipedia and [[political groups]]. Google is a major search engine that is made of millions of websites that have been created by people all around the world. It has the ability to share knowledge and creativity with each other to collaborate and expand thoughts and expressions. Google includes five key dynamics within their teams to create a well-collaborated system. Dynamics include [[psychological safety]], [[dependability]], structure & clarity, meaning of work and impact of work.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/|title=re:Work - The five keys to a successful Google team|website=rework.withgoogle.com|language=en|access-date=2020-04-06}}</ref> Their ideas behind their rediscovery of collective intelligence is to ensure that all workers can express themselves without any fear of potential embarrassment.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://collectiveintelligence.ca/google-rediscovers-collective-intelligence/|title=Google (re)discovers collective intelligence|date=2018-04-10|website=Collective Intelligence|language=en-US|access-date=2020-04-06}}</ref> Google's teamwork is said to be one of the main reasons for their success by including the use of emotional and collective intelligence to ensure teamwork is involved in any discussions.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.inc.com/robin-camarote/google-study-reveals-emotional-intelligence-on-teams-determines-success.html|title=What Google's New Emotional Intelligence Study Says About Teamwork and Success|last=Camarote|first=Robin|date=2016-03-14|website=Inc.com|access-date=2020-04-06}}</ref> The system behind Google exemplifies the combining of knowledge of the web-to-people not just knowledge of people-to-people.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/legacy/forums/collective_intelligence.html|title=Collective Intelligence|website=web.mit.edu|access-date=2020-04-06}}</ref>
Collective intelligence is used to help create widely known platforms including Google, Wikipedia and political groups. Google is a major search engine that is made of millions of websites that have been created by people all around the world. It has the ability to share knowledge and creativity with each other to collaborate and expand thoughts and expressions. Google includes five key dynamics within their teams to create a well-collaborated system. Dynamics include psychological safety, dependability, structure & clarity, meaning of work and impact of work. Their ideas behind their rediscovery of collective intelligence is to ensure that all workers can express themselves without any fear of potential embarrassment. Google's teamwork is said to be one of the main reasons for their success by including the use of emotional and collective intelligence to ensure teamwork is involved in any discussions. The system behind Google exemplifies the combining of knowledge of the web-to-people not just knowledge of people-to-people.
集体智慧被用来帮助创建广为人知的平台，包括谷歌、维基百科和政治团体。谷歌是一个主要的搜索引擎，由世界各地的人们创建的数百万个网站组成。它具有相互分享知识和创造力的能力，以协作和扩大思想和表达。谷歌在他们的团队中包含了五个关键的动力来创建一个良好合作的系统。动力包括心理安全感、可靠性、结构清晰度、工作意义和工作影响力。他们重新发现集体智慧背后的想法是，确保所有员工都能表达自己的观点，而不用担心可能出现的尴尬。谷歌的团队合作被认为是他们成功的主要原因之一，因为他们运用情感和集体智慧来确保团队合作参与任何讨论。谷歌背后的系统体现了网络知识与人之间的结合，而不仅仅是人与人之间的知识。
Writers who have influenced the idea of collective intelligence include [[Francis Galton]], [[Douglas Hofstadter]] (1979), Peter Russell (1983), [[Tom Atlee]] (1993), [[Pierre Lévy (philosopher)|Pierre Lévy]] (1994), [[Howard Bloom]] (1995), [[Francis Heylighen]] (1995), [[Douglas Engelbart]], [[Louis Rosenberg (entrepreneur)|Louis Rosenberg]], [[Cliff Joslyn]], [[Ron Dembo]], [[Gottfried Mayer-Kress]] (2003).
Writers who have influenced the idea of collective intelligence include Francis Galton, Douglas Hofstadter (1979), Peter Russell (1983), Tom Atlee (1993), Pierre Lévy (1994), Howard Bloom (1995), Francis Heylighen (1995), Douglas Engelbart, Louis Rosenberg, Cliff Joslyn, Ron Dembo, Gottfried Mayer-Kress (2003).
影响集体智慧观念的作家包括 Francis Galton，侯世达(1979) ，Peter Russell (1983) ，Tom Atlee (1993) ，Pierre l vy (1994) ，Howard Bloom (1995) ，Francis Heylighen (1995) ，道格拉斯·恩格尔巴特，Louis Rosenberg，Cliff Joslyn，Ron Dembo，Gottfried Mayer-Kress (2003)。
{{TOC limit|3}}
== History ==
[[File:World Brain HG Wells 1938.jpg|left|thumb|H.G. Wells ''World Brain'' (1936–1938)]]
H.G. Wells World Brain (1936–1938)
H.g.威尔士世界大脑(1936-1938)
The concept (although not so named) originated in 1785 with the [[Marquis de Condorcet]], whose "jury theorem" states that if each member of a voting group is more likely than not to make a correct decision, the probability that the highest vote of the group is the correct decision increases with the number of members of the group (see [[Condorcet's jury theorem]]).<ref>{{cite book|last1=Landemore|first1=Hélène|title=Landemore, Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many|date=2012|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton|url=https://books.google.com/?id=B-6YNnIIlE8C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage|isbn=978-0691155654}}</ref> Many theorists have interpreted [[Aristotle]]'s statement in the [[Politics]] that "a feast to which many contribute is better than a dinner provided out of a single purse" to mean that just as many may bring different dishes to the table, so in a deliberation many may contribute different pieces of information to generate a better decision.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Waldron|first1=Jeremy|title=The Wisdom of the Multitude: Some Reflections on Book 3, Chapter 11 of Aristotle's Politics|journal=Political Theory|date=1995|volume=23|issue=4|pages=563–584|doi=10.1177/0090591795023004001}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Ober|first1=Josiah|title=Democracy and Knowledge|date=2008|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton, N.J.|pages=110–14}}</ref> Recent scholarship,<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Cammack|first1=Daniela|title=Aristotle and the Virtue of the Multitude|journal=Political Theory|date=2013|volume=41|issue=2|pages=175–202|doi=10.1177/0090591712470423|url=https://zenodo.org/record/1063691}}</ref> however, suggests that this was probably not what Aristotle meant but is a modern interpretation based on what we now know about team intelligence.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Page|first1=Scott|title=The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies|date=2008|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton}}</ref>
The concept (although not so named) originated in 1785 with the Marquis de Condorcet, whose "jury theorem" states that if each member of a voting group is more likely than not to make a correct decision, the probability that the highest vote of the group is the correct decision increases with the number of members of the group (see Condorcet's jury theorem). Many theorists have interpreted Aristotle's statement in the Politics that "a feast to which many contribute is better than a dinner provided out of a single purse" to mean that just as many may bring different dishes to the table, so in a deliberation many may contribute different pieces of information to generate a better decision. Recent scholarship, however, suggests that this was probably not what Aristotle meant but is a modern interpretation based on what we now know about team intelligence.
这个概念(虽然没有这样命名)起源于1785年的美国马奎斯·孔多塞，其“陪审团定理”指出，如果一个投票群体中的每个成员更有可能做出一个正确的决定，那么该群体中得票最多的成员做出正确决定的概率随着该群体成员数的增加而增加(见 Condorcet 的陪审团定理)。许多理论家将亚里士多德在《政治学》中的一句话解释为“多人参与的盛宴胜过一个钱包提供的晚餐” ，这意味着正如许多人可以将不同的菜肴端上餐桌，所以在商议中许多人可以贡献不同的信息来产生一个更好的决定。然而，最近的学术研究表明，这可能不是亚里士多德的意思，而是基于我们现在所知道的团队智力的现代解释。
A precursor of the concept is found in entomologist [[William Morton Wheeler]]'s observation that seemingly independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism (1910).<ref>Wheeler, W. M. (1910). Ants: their structure, development and behavior (Vol. 9). Columbia University Press.</ref> Wheeler saw this collaborative process at work in [[ants]] that acted like the cells of a single beast he called a [[superorganism]].
A precursor of the concept is found in entomologist William Morton Wheeler's observation that seemingly independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism (1910). Wheeler saw this collaborative process at work in ants that acted like the cells of a single beast he called a superorganism.
这个概念的先驱是在昆虫学家威廉·莫顿·惠勒的观察中发现的，表面上看起来独立的个体可以如此紧密地合作，以至于变得与一个生物体无法区分(1910)。惠勒在蚂蚁身上看到了这种协作过程，蚂蚁的行为就像一头被他称为超个体的野兽的细胞。
In 1912 [[Émile Durkheim]] identified society as the sole source of human logical thought. He argued in "[[The Elementary Forms of Religious Life]]" that society constitutes a higher intelligence because it transcends the individual over space and time.<ref>Émile Durkheim, ''The Elementary Forms of Religious Life'', 1912.</ref> Other antecedents are [[Vladimir Vernadsky]] and [[Pierre Teilhard de Chardin]]'s concept of "[[noosphere]]" and [[H.G. Wells]]'s concept of "[[world brain]]" (see also the term "[[global brain]]"). Peter Russell, [[Elisabet Sahtouris]], and [[Barbara Marx Hubbard]] (originator of the term "conscious evolution")<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://barbaramarxhubbard.com/book/|title=About the Book – Foundation for Conscious Evolution|newspaper=Foundation for Conscious Evolution|access-date=2016-12-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170218124636/http://barbaramarxhubbard.com/book/|archive-date=18 February 2017|url-status=dead}}</ref> are inspired by the visions of a noosphere – a transcendent, rapidly evolving collective intelligence – an informational cortex of the planet. The notion has more recently been examined by the philosopher Pierre Lévy. In a 1962 research report, [[Douglas Engelbart]] linked collective intelligence to organizational effectiveness, and predicted that pro-actively 'augmenting human intellect' would yield a multiplier effect in group problem solving: "Three people working together in this augmented mode [would] seem to be more than three times as effective in solving a complex problem as is one augmented person working alone".<ref>Engelbart, Douglas (1962) [http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-3906.html#3b9 Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110504035147/http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-3906.html#3b9 |date=4 May 2011 }} – section on Team Cooperation</ref> In 1994, he coined the term 'collective IQ' as a measure of collective intelligence, to focus attention on the opportunity to significantly raise collective IQ in business and society.<ref>Engelbart, Douglas (1994)[https://archive.org/stream/boostingcollecti00drdo#page/n9/mode/2up Boosting Collective IQ] (Slide Handouts) – 'Collective IQ' defined on Slide 4; also (1994) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdIWQZtEq04&t=1016 BBN Distinguished Guest Lecture] (Video) – 'Collective IQ' defined @16:56 "CoDIAK"</ref>
In 1912 Émile Durkheim identified society as the sole source of human logical thought. He argued in "The Elementary Forms of Religious Life" that society constitutes a higher intelligence because it transcends the individual over space and time. Other antecedents are Vladimir Vernadsky and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's concept of "noosphere" and H.G. Wells's concept of "world brain" (see also the term "global brain"). Peter Russell, Elisabet Sahtouris, and Barbara Marx Hubbard (originator of the term "conscious evolution") are inspired by the visions of a noosphere – a transcendent, rapidly evolving collective intelligence – an informational cortex of the planet. The notion has more recently been examined by the philosopher Pierre Lévy. In a 1962 research report, Douglas Engelbart linked collective intelligence to organizational effectiveness, and predicted that pro-actively 'augmenting human intellect' would yield a multiplier effect in group problem solving: "Three people working together in this augmented mode [would] seem to be more than three times as effective in solving a complex problem as is one augmented person working alone". In 1994, he coined the term 'collective IQ' as a measure of collective intelligence, to focus attention on the opportunity to significantly raise collective IQ in business and society.
1912年，涂尔干认为社会是人类逻辑思维的唯一来源。他在《宗教生活的基本形式》一书中认为，社会构成了一种更高级的智慧，因为它超越了个人的空间和时间。其他先行词还有复杂系统和德日进的“人圈”概念和 h.g。威尔斯的“世界大脑”的概念(也见术语“全球大脑”)。彼得•罗素(Peter Russell)、伊丽莎白•萨图里斯(Elisabet Sahtouris)和芭芭拉•马克思•哈伯德(Barbara Marx Hubbard)(“有意识进化”(conscious evolution)一词的创始人)的灵感来自人类圈——一种超验的、快速进化的集体智慧——地球的信息皮层。最近，哲学家皮埃尔 · l · 维对这一概念进行了检验。在1962年的一份研究报告中，道格拉斯·恩格尔巴特将集体智慧与组织效能联系起来，并预测积极主动的‘增强人类智力’将在解决团队问题中产生乘数效应: “在这种增强模式下，三个人一起工作，解决复杂问题的效率似乎是一个增强人单独工作的效率的三倍多。”。1994年，他创造了集体智商这一术语作为集体智商的衡量标准，将注意力集中在显著提高商业和社会集体智商的机会上。
The idea of collective intelligence also forms the framework for contemporary democratic theories often referred to as [[epistemic democracy]]. Epistemic democratic theories refer to the capacity of the populace, either through deliberation or aggregation of knowledge, to track the truth and relies on mechanisms to synthesize and apply collective intelligence.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Landemore|first1=Helene|title=Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many|date=2013|publisher=Princeton University Press|url=https://books.google.com/?id=B-6YNnIIlE8C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage|isbn=978-0691155654}}</ref>
The idea of collective intelligence also forms the framework for contemporary democratic theories often referred to as epistemic democracy. Epistemic democratic theories refer to the capacity of the populace, either through deliberation or aggregation of knowledge, to track the truth and relies on mechanisms to synthesize and apply collective intelligence.
集体智慧的思想也形成了当代民主理论的框架，通常被称为认知民主。认知民主理论是指民众通过审议或聚集知识来追踪真相的能力，并依靠机制来综合和应用集体智慧。
Collective intelligence was introduced into the machine learning community in the late 20th century,<ref name="Wolpert arXiv:cs/9905004">{{Cite journal|last=Wolpert|first=David H.|last2=Tumer|first2=Kagan|last3=Frank|first3=Jeremy|date=1999-05-10|title=Using Collective Intelligence to Route Internet Traffic|journal=Advances in Information Processing Systems, Eds M. Kearns, S. Solla, D. Cohn, MIT Press|volume=11|issue=1999|pages=arXiv:cs/9905004|arxiv=cs/9905004|bibcode=1999cs........5004W}}</ref> and matured into a broader consideration of how to design "collectives" of self-interested adaptive agents to meet a system-wide goal.<ref>{{cite journal|last2=Tumer|first2=Kagan|last1=Wolpert|first1=David|title=Collective Intelligence, Data Routing and Braess' Paradox"Volume=16|pages=359–387|date=2004|journal=Journal of Artficial Intelligence Research}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Tumer|first1=Kagan|last2=Wolpert|first2=David|title=Collectives and the design of complex systems|date=2004|publisher=Springer}}</ref> This was related to single-agent work on "reward shaping"<ref>{{cite article|last1=Ng|first1=Andrew|last2=Harada|first2=Daishi|last3=Russell|first3=Stuart|title=Policy Invariance Under Reward Transformations: Theory and Application to Reward Shaping|date=1999|publisher=ICML '99 Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Machine Learning}}</ref> and has been taken forward by numerous researchers in
Collective intelligence was introduced into the machine learning community in the late 20th century, and matured into a broader consideration of how to design "collectives" of self-interested adaptive agents to meet a system-wide goal. This was related to single-agent work on "reward shaping" and has been taken forward by numerous researchers in
集体智能在20世纪后期被引入机器学习领域，并成熟为如何设计自利自适应代理的“集体”以满足系统范围的目标的更广泛的思考。这与单个代理人的“奖赏塑造”工作有关，并在年被众多研究人员所推动
the game theory and engineering communities.<ref>{{cite article|last1=Marden|first1=Jason|last2=Shamma|first2=Jeff|title=Game Theoretic Learning in Distributed Control|date=2017|publisher=Handbook of Dynamic Game Theory|url=https://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~jrmarden/files/Learning-Chapter.pdf}}</ref>
the game theory and engineering communities.
博弈论和工程社区。
== Dimensions ==
[[File:Complex adaptive system.gif|thumb|Complex adaptive systems model]]
Complex adaptive systems model
复杂自适应系统模型
[[Howard Bloom]] has discussed mass behavior – [[collective behavior]] from the level of quarks to the level of bacterial, plant, animal, and human societies. He stresses the biological adaptations that have turned most of this earth's living beings into components of what he calls "a learning machine". In 1986 Bloom combined the concepts of [[apoptosis]], [[parallel distributed processing]], [[group selection]], and the superorganism to produce a theory of how collective intelligence works.<ref>Howard Bloom, ''The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History'', 1995</ref> Later he showed how the collective intelligences of competing bacterial colonies and human societies can be explained in terms of computer-generated "[[complex adaptive systems]]" and the "[[genetic algorithms]]", concepts pioneered by [[John Henry Holland|John Holland]].<ref name="bloom2000"/>
Howard Bloom has discussed mass behavior – collective behavior from the level of quarks to the level of bacterial, plant, animal, and human societies. He stresses the biological adaptations that have turned most of this earth's living beings into components of what he calls "a learning machine". In 1986 Bloom combined the concepts of apoptosis, parallel distributed processing, group selection, and the superorganism to produce a theory of how collective intelligence works. Later he showed how the collective intelligences of competing bacterial colonies and human societies can be explained in terms of computer-generated "complex adaptive systems" and the "genetic algorithms", concepts pioneered by John Holland.
霍华德 · 布鲁姆讨论了从夸克层次到细菌、植物、动物和人类社会层次的大规模行为-集体行为。他强调了生物学上的适应性，这种适应性把地球上的大多数生物变成了他所说的“学习机器”的组成部分。1986年，Bloom 将细胞凋亡、并行分布处理、群体选择和超个体等概念结合起来，提出了集体智慧是如何工作的理论。随后，他展示了如何用计算机生成的“复杂适应系统”和约翰 · 霍兰德率先提出的“遗传算法”来解释竞争细菌群落和人类社会的集体智能。
Bloom traced the evolution of collective intelligence to our bacterial ancestors 1 billion years ago and demonstrated how a multi-species intelligence has worked since the beginning of life.<ref name="bloom2000">Howard Bloom, ''Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century'', 2000</ref> Ant societies exhibit more intelligence, in terms of technology, than any other animal except for humans and co-operate in keeping livestock, for example [[aphid]]s for "milking".<ref name="bloom2000" /> Leaf cutters care for fungi and carry leaves to feed the fungi.<ref name="bloom2000" />
Bloom traced the evolution of collective intelligence to our bacterial ancestors 1 billion years ago and demonstrated how a multi-species intelligence has worked since the beginning of life. Ant societies exhibit more intelligence, in terms of technology, than any other animal except for humans and co-operate in keeping livestock, for example aphids for "milking". Leaf cutters care for fungi and carry leaves to feed the fungi.
布鲁姆追溯集体智慧的进化可以追溯到10亿年前我们的细菌祖先，并演示了从生命开始以来多物种智慧是如何工作的。就技术而言，除了人类以外，蚂蚁社会比其他任何动物都更加聪明，在饲养家畜方面也更加合作，例如用于“挤奶”的蚜虫。切叶者照顾真菌，并携带叶子喂养真菌。
[[David Skrbina]]<ref>Skrbina, D., 2001, [https://web.archive.org/web/20110604164440/http://www.bath.ac.uk/carpp/publications/doc_theses_links/pdf/dt_ds_chapter8.pdf Participation, Organization, and Mind: Toward a Participatory Worldview], ch. 8, Doctoral Thesis, Centre for Action Research in Professional Practice, School of Management, University of Bath: England</ref> cites the concept of a 'group mind' as being derived from Plato's concept of [[panpsychism]] (that mind or consciousness is omnipresent and exists in all matter). He develops the concept of a 'group mind' as articulated by [[Thomas Hobbes]] in "Leviathan" and [[Gustav Fechner|Fechner]]'s arguments for a [[collective consciousness]] of mankind. He cites [[Émile Durkheim|Durkheim]] as the most notable advocate of a "collective consciousness"<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=Er3lCAAAQBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=david+skrbina+durkheim#v=onepage|title=Authenticity, Autonomy and Multiculturalism|last=Levey|first=Geoffrey Brahm|date=2015-05-01|publisher=Routledge|isbn=9781317535928}}</ref> and [[Teilhard de Chardin]] as a thinker who has developed the philosophical implications of the group mind.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Panpsychism in the West|last=Skrbina|first=David F.|date=2007-01-26|publisher=The MIT Press|isbn=9780262693516|edition=1}}</ref>
David Skrbina cites the concept of a 'group mind' as being derived from Plato's concept of panpsychism (that mind or consciousness is omnipresent and exists in all matter). He develops the concept of a 'group mind' as articulated by Thomas Hobbes in "Leviathan" and Fechner's arguments for a collective consciousness of mankind. He cites Durkheim as the most notable advocate of a "collective consciousness" and Teilhard de Chardin as a thinker who has developed the philosophical implications of the group mind.
大卫 · 斯科比纳引用了“群体心智”的概念，认为这个概念来源于柏拉图的泛心理学(心智或意识无处不在，存在于所有物质中)。他发展了托马斯 · 霍布斯在《利维坦》和费希纳关于人类集体意识的论证中阐述的“群体心智”的概念。他认为涂尔干是“集体意识”最著名的倡导者，而 Chardin 是一位发展了集体意识的哲学含义的思想家。
Tom Atlee focuses primarily on humans and on work to upgrade what Howard Bloom calls "the group IQ". Atlee feels that collective intelligence can be encouraged "to overcome '[[groupthink]]' and individual [[cognitive bias]] in order to allow a collective to cooperate on one process – while achieving enhanced intellectual performance." George Pór defined the collective intelligence phenomenon as "the capacity of human communities to evolve towards higher order complexity and harmony, through such innovation mechanisms as differentiation and integration, competition and collaboration."<ref>George Pór, [http://www.community-intelligence.com/blogs/public Blog of Collective Intelligence] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040802231025/http://www.community-intelligence.com/blogs/public |date=2 August 2004 }}</ref> Atlee and Pór state that "collective intelligence also involves achieving a single focus of attention and standard of metrics which provide an appropriate threshold of action".<ref name=":20">{{Cite web|url=http://community-intelligence.com/files/Atlee%20-%20Por%20-%20CI%20as%20a%20Field%20of%20multidisciplinary%20study%20and%20practice%20.pdf|title=Collective Intelligence as a Field of Multi‐disciplinary Study and Practice|last=Atlee|first=Tom|date=|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=December 11, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161220200827/http://community-intelligence.com/files/Atlee%20-%20Por%20-%20CI%20as%20a%20Field%20of%20multidisciplinary%20study%20and%20practice%20.pdf|archive-date=20 December 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> Their approach is rooted in [[scientific community metaphor]].<ref name=":20" />
Tom Atlee focuses primarily on humans and on work to upgrade what Howard Bloom calls "the group IQ". Atlee feels that collective intelligence can be encouraged "to overcome 'groupthink' and individual cognitive bias in order to allow a collective to cooperate on one process – while achieving enhanced intellectual performance." George Pór defined the collective intelligence phenomenon as "the capacity of human communities to evolve towards higher order complexity and harmony, through such innovation mechanisms as differentiation and integration, competition and collaboration." Atlee and Pór state that "collective intelligence also involves achieving a single focus of attention and standard of metrics which provide an appropriate threshold of action". Their approach is rooted in scientific community metaphor.
汤姆 · 阿特利主要关注人类和提升霍华德 · 布鲁姆所说的“群智商”的工作。艾特利认为，可以鼓励集体智慧“克服‘群体思维’和个人认知偏见，以便允许集体在一个过程中进行合作——同时提高智力表现。”乔治 · 皮尔将集体智慧现象定义为“人类社会通过差异化与整合、竞争与协作等创新机制向高阶复杂性与和谐发展的能力”Atlee 和 pr 指出，”集体智慧还包括实现单一关注焦点和提供适当行动阈值的衡量标准”。他们的方法植根于科学共同体的隐喻。
The term group intelligence is sometimes used interchangeably with the term collective intelligence. Anita Woolley presents Collective intelligence as a measure of group intelligence and group creativity.<ref name=":0" /> The idea is that a measure of collective intelligence covers a broad range of features of the group, mainly group composition and group interaction.<ref name=":11" /> The features of composition that lead to increased levels of collective intelligence in groups include criteria such as higher numbers of women in the group as well as increased diversity of the group.<ref name=":11"/>
The term group intelligence is sometimes used interchangeably with the term collective intelligence. Anita Woolley presents Collective intelligence as a measure of group intelligence and group creativity. The idea is that a measure of collective intelligence covers a broad range of features of the group, mainly group composition and group interaction. The features of composition that lead to increased levels of collective intelligence in groups include criteria such as higher numbers of women in the group as well as increased diversity of the group.
群体智慧这个术语有时与集体智慧这个术语可以互换使用。安妮塔 · 伍利将集体智慧作为衡量群体智慧和群体创造力的标准。这种观点认为，集体智慧的衡量标准涵盖了群体的广泛特征，主要是群体组成和群体互动。导致群体集体智慧水平提高的组成特征包括群体中妇女人数较多以及群体多样性增加等标准。
Atlee and Pór suggest that the field of collective intelligence should primarily be seen as a human enterprise in which mind-sets, a willingness to share and an openness to the value of distributed intelligence for the common good are paramount, though group theory and [[artificial intelligence]] have something to offer.<ref name=":20" /> Individuals who respect collective intelligence are confident of their own abilities and recognize that the whole is indeed greater than the sum of any individual parts.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Leimeister|first=Jan Marco|date=2010-06-24|title=Collective Intelligence|journal=Business & Information Systems Engineering|volume=2|issue=4|pages=245–248|doi=10.1007/s12599-010-0114-8|url=http://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/export/DL/221423.pdf}}</ref> Maximizing collective intelligence relies on the ability of an organization to accept and develop "The Golden Suggestion", which is any potentially useful input from any member.<ref name=":21" /> [[Groupthink]] often hampers collective intelligence by limiting input to a select few individuals or filtering potential Golden Suggestions without fully developing them to implementation.<ref name=":20" />
Atlee and Pór suggest that the field of collective intelligence should primarily be seen as a human enterprise in which mind-sets, a willingness to share and an openness to the value of distributed intelligence for the common good are paramount, though group theory and artificial intelligence have something to offer. Maximizing collective intelligence relies on the ability of an organization to accept and develop "The Golden Suggestion", which is any potentially useful input from any member. Groupthink often hampers collective intelligence by limiting input to a select few individuals or filtering potential Golden Suggestions without fully developing them to implementation.
阿特里和皮尔认为，集体智慧领域首先应该被看作是一个人类企业，其中最重要的是思维定势、愿意分享以及对分布式智能的价值持开放态度，以实现共同利益，尽管群体理论和人工智能可以提供一些东西。集体智慧的最大化依赖于一个组织接受和发展“黄金建议”的能力，这是任何成员提供的任何潜在有用的投入。群体思维通常会限制对少数人的输入，或者过滤潜在的黄金建议，从而阻碍集体智慧的发展。
[[Robert David Steele Vivas]] in ''The New Craft of Intelligence'' portrayed all citizens as "intelligence minutemen," drawing only on legal and ethical sources of information, able to create a "public intelligence" that keeps public officials and corporate managers honest, turning the concept of "national intelligence" (previously concerned about spies and secrecy) on its head.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The New Craft of Intelligence: Personal, Public, & Political—Citizen's Action Handbook for Fighting Terrorism, Genocide, Disease, Toxic Bombs, & Corruption|last=Steele|first=Robert David|date=2002-04-08|publisher=Oss Pr|isbn=9780971566118|location=Oakton, Va.}}</ref>
Robert David Steele Vivas in The New Craft of Intelligence portrayed all citizens as "intelligence minutemen," drawing only on legal and ethical sources of information, able to create a "public intelligence" that keeps public officials and corporate managers honest, turning the concept of "national intelligence" (previously concerned about spies and secrecy) on its head.
在《情报的新工艺》一书中，罗伯特·大卫·斯蒂尔 · 维瓦斯将所有公民描绘成“情报一分钟人” ，仅仅依靠法律和道德信息来源，能够创造一种“公共情报” ，使公职人员和企业管理人员保持诚实，颠覆了“国家情报”(以前关注间谍和保密)的概念。
[[File:Mass_collaboration.jpg|thumb|Stigmergic Collaboration: a theoretical framework for mass collaboration]]
Stigmergic Collaboration: a theoretical framework for mass collaboration
创新协作: 大众协作的理论框架
According to [[Don Tapscott]] and [[Anthony D. Williams (author)|Anthony D. Williams]], collective intelligence is [[mass collaboration]]. In order for this concept to happen, four principles need to exist;<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
According to Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams, collective intelligence is mass collaboration. In order for this concept to happen, four principles need to exist;
按照 Don Tapscott 和 Anthony d. Williams 的说法，集体智慧就是大规模的合作。要实现这个概念，需要有四个原则;
; Openness: [[idea sharing|Sharing ideas]] and [[intellectual property]]: though these resources provide the edge over competitors more benefits accrue from allowing others to share ideas and gain significant improvement and scrutiny through collaboration.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Openness: Sharing ideas and intellectual property: though these resources provide the edge over competitors more benefits accrue from allowing others to share ideas and gain significant improvement and scrutiny through collaboration.
开放性: 分享想法和知识产权: 尽管这些资源提供了相对于竞争对手的优势，但允许其他人分享想法并通过合作获得重大改进和审查会带来更多好处。
; Peering: Horizontal organization as with the 'opening up' of the Linux program where users are free to modify and develop it provided that they make it available for others. Peering succeeds because it encourages [[self-organization]] – a style of production that works more effectively than hierarchical management for certain tasks.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Peering: Horizontal organization as with the 'opening up' of the Linux program where users are free to modify and develop it provided that they make it available for others. Peering succeeds because it encourages self-organization – a style of production that works more effectively than hierarchical management for certain tasks.
凝视: 与 Linux 程序的开放一样的横向组织，用户可以自由地修改和开发它，只要他们将它提供给其他人。成功的原因在于它鼓励自我组织---- 一种对某些任务比分层管理更有效的生产方式。
; [[Sharing]]: Companies have started to share some ideas while maintaining some degree of control over others, like potential and critical [[patent rights]]. Limiting all intellectual property shuts out opportunities, while sharing some expands markets and brings out products faster.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Sharing: Companies have started to share some ideas while maintaining some degree of control over others, like potential and critical patent rights. Limiting all intellectual property shuts out opportunities, while sharing some expands markets and brings out products faster.
分享: 公司已经开始分享一些想法，同时保持一定程度的控制权，比如潜在的和关键的专利权。限制所有的知识产权将机会拒之门外，而分享一些知识产权则会更快地扩大市场和推出产品。
; Acting Globally: The advancement in communication technology has prompted the rise of global companies at low overhead costs. The [[internet]] is widespread, therefore a globally integrated company has no geographical boundaries and may access new markets, ideas and technology.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008">Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2008). ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=DVomiOeBg_YC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything]'', USA: Penguin Group</ref>
Acting Globally: The advancement in communication technology has prompted the rise of global companies at low overhead costs. The internet is widespread, therefore a globally integrated company has no geographical boundaries and may access new markets, ideas and technology.
全球行动: 通信技术的进步促使全球公司以低廉的管理费用崛起。互联网是普遍的，因此一个全球性的综合性公司没有地理边界，可以进入新的市场，思想和技术。
== Collective intelligence factor ''c'' ==
[[File:Scree plot showing percent of explained variance for the first five factors in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies as well as the individual intelligence test for all participants (assessed with Wonderlic Personnel Test).png|thumb|[[Scree plot]] showing percent of explained variance for the first factors in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies.]]
[[Scree plot showing percent of explained variance for the first factors in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies.]]
[[在伍利等人的第一个因素的解释方差百分比的斯克里图显示。[2010年的两项原始研究]
A new scientific understanding of collective intelligence defines it as a group's general ability to perform a wide range of tasks.<ref name=":0" /> Definition, operationalization and statistical methods are similar to the [[G factor (psychometrics)|psychometric approach of general individual intelligence]]. Hereby, an individual's performance on a given set of cognitive tasks is used to measure general cognitive ability indicated by the general intelligence [[G factor (psychometrics)|factor ''g'']] extracted via [[factor analysis]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Spearman|first=Charles, E.|date=1904|title="General intelligence," objectively determined and measured|url=|journal=American Journal of Psychology |volume=15 |issue=2|pages=201–293|doi=10.2307/1412107|pmid=|jstor=1412107}}</ref> In the same vein as ''g'' serves to display between-individual performance differences on cognitive tasks, collective intelligence research aims to find a parallel intelligence factor for groups {{'}}''c'' factor'<ref name=":0" /> (also called 'collective intelligence factor' (''CI'')<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|author1=Engel, D. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Jing, L. X. |author4=Chabris, C. F. |author5= Malone, T. W. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2014|title=Reading the Mind in the Eyes or reading between the lines? Theory of Mind predicts collective intelligence equally well online and face-to-face|journal=PLOS One |volume=9 |issue=12 |pages=e115212|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0115212|pmid=25514387 |pmc=4267836|bibcode=2014PLoSO...9k5212E }}</ref>) displaying between-group differences on task performance. The collective intelligence score then is used to predict how this same group will perform on any other similar task in the future. Yet tasks, hereby, refer to mental or intellectual tasks performed by small groups<ref name=":0" /> even though the concept is hoped to be transferable to other performances and any groups or crowds reaching from families to companies and even whole cities.<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal|author1=Woolley, A. |author2= Malone, T. |last-author-amp=yes |date=June 2011|title=Defend your research: What makes a team smarter? More women|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51453001|journal=Harvard Business Review |volume=89 |issue=6 |pages=32–33|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> Since individuals' ''g'' factor scores are highly correlated with full-scale [[Intelligence quotient|IQ]] scores, which are in turn regarded as good estimates of ''g'',<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /> this measurement of collective intelligence can also be seen as an intelligence indicator or quotient respectively for a group (Group-IQ) parallel to an individual's intelligence quotient (IQ) even though the score is not a quotient per se.
A new scientific understanding of collective intelligence defines it as a group's general ability to perform a wide range of tasks. In the same vein as g serves to display between-individual performance differences on cognitive tasks, collective intelligence research aims to find a parallel intelligence factor for groups c factor') displaying between-group differences on task performance. The collective intelligence score then is used to predict how this same group will perform on any other similar task in the future. Yet tasks, hereby, refer to mental or intellectual tasks performed by small groups Since individuals' g factor scores are highly correlated with full-scale IQ scores, which are in turn regarded as good estimates of g, this measurement of collective intelligence can also be seen as an intelligence indicator or quotient respectively for a group (Group-IQ) parallel to an individual's intelligence quotient (IQ) even though the score is not a quotient per se.
对集体智慧的一种新的科学理解将它定义为一个群体执行广泛任务的一般能力。集体智力研究的目的在于找到一个平行的智力因素来表现群体间的任务绩效差异。然后集体智慧分数被用来预测同一组人在未来任何其他类似任务中的表现。由于个人的 g 因子得分与全面的 IQ 得分高度相关，而全面的 IQ 得分又被认为是对 g 的良好估计，因此这种集体智力的测量也可以分别被视为一个与个人的智商 / 智商(IQ)平行的群体(group-IQ)的智力指标或商，即使这个分数本身并不是商数。
Mathematically, ''c'' and ''g'' are both variables summarizing positive correlations among different tasks supposing that performance on one task is comparable with performance on other similar tasks.<ref name=":5">{{Cite book|title=A history of intelligence test interpretation. In D.P. Flanagan and P.L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (2nd Ed.)|author1=Kamphaus, R.W. |author2=Winsor, A.P. |author3=Rowe, E.W. |author4= Kim, S. |last-author-amp=yes |publisher=Guilford|year=2005|isbn=|location=New York, NY|pages=23–38}}</ref> ''c'' thus is a source of variance among groups and can only be considered as a group's standing on the ''c'' factor compared to other groups in a given relevant population.<ref name=":2" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last=van der Maas|first=Han L. J.|last2=Dolan|first2=Conor V.|last3=Grasman|first3=Raoul P. P. P.|last4=Wicherts|first4=Jelte M.|last5=Huizenga|first5=Hilde M.|last6=Raijmakers|first6=Maartje E. J.|date=2006-10-01|title=A dynamical model of general intelligence: the positive manifold of intelligence by mutualism|journal=Psychological Review|volume=113|issue=4|pages=842–861|doi=10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.842|pmid=17014305}}</ref> The concept is in contrast to competing hypotheses including other correlational structures to explain group intelligence,<ref name=":0" /> such as a composition out of several equally important but independent factors as found in [[Big Five personality traits|individual personality research]].<ref>{{Cite journal|author1=McCrae, R. R. |author2=Costa Jr., P. T.|date=1987|title=Validation of the Five-Factor Model of Personality Across Instruments and Observers|url=http://webs.wofford.edu/steinmetzkr/teaching/Psy150/Lecture%20PDFs/FiveFactorModel.pdf|journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |volume=52 |issue=1 |pages=81–90|doi=10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81|pmid=3820081|access-date=}}</ref>
Mathematically, c and g are both variables summarizing positive correlations among different tasks supposing that performance on one task is comparable with performance on other similar tasks. c thus is a source of variance among groups and can only be considered as a group's standing on the c factor compared to other groups in a given relevant population. The concept is in contrast to competing hypotheses including other correlational structures to explain group intelligence,
数学上，c 和 g 都是变量，总结了不同任务之间的正相关性，假设一项任务的表现与其他类似任务的表现是可比的。因此，c 是各群体之间差异的来源，只能被视为一个群体在 c 系数上与某一特定相关人口中的其他群体相比的地位。这个概念与包括其他相关结构在内的竞争性假设形成对比，以解释群体智力,
Besides, this scientific idea also aims to explore the causes affecting collective intelligence, such as group size, collaboration tools or group members' interpersonal skills.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web|url=http://cci.mit.edu/research_developing.html|title=MIT Center for Collective Intelligence|website=cci.mit.edu|access-date=2016-04-26|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160330091237/http://cci.mit.edu/research_developing.html|archive-date=30 March 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> The [[MIT Center for Collective Intelligence]], for instance, announced the detection of ''The Genome of Collective Intelligence''<ref name=":3" /> as one of its main goals aiming to develop a ''taxonomy of organizational building blocks, or genes, that can be combined and recombined to harness the intelligence of crowds''.<ref name=":3" />
Besides, this scientific idea also aims to explore the causes affecting collective intelligence, such as group size, collaboration tools or group members' interpersonal skills. The MIT Center for Collective Intelligence, for instance, announced the detection of The Genome of Collective Intelligence as one of its main goals aiming to develop a taxonomy of organizational building blocks, or genes, that can be combined and recombined to harness the intelligence of crowds.
此外，这一科学思想还旨在探索影响集体智慧的原因，如群体规模、协作工具或群体成员的人际交往技能。例如，麻省理工学院集体智慧中心宣布，探测集体智慧的基因组作为其主要目标之一，旨在发展组织构件或基因的分类，这些基因可以被组合和重组，以利用群体的智慧。
=== Causes ===
Individual intelligence is shown to be genetically and environmentally influenced.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Briley|first=Daniel A.|last2=Tucker-Drob|first2=Elliot M.|date=2014-09-01|title=Genetic and environmental continuity in personality development: a meta-analysis|journal=Psychological Bulletin|volume=140|issue=5|pages=1303–1331|doi=10.1037/a0037091|pmc=4152379|pmid=24956122}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Deary|first=Ian J.|last2=Spinath|first2=Frank M.|last3=Bates|first3=Timothy C.|date=2006-01-01|title=Genetics of intelligence|journal=European Journal of Human Genetics|volume=14|issue=6|pages=690–700|doi=10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201588|pmid=16721405|doi-access=free}}</ref> Analogously, collective intelligence research aims to explore reasons why certain groups perform more intelligent than other groups given that ''c'' is just moderately correlated with the intelligence of individual group members.<ref name=":0" /> According to Woolley et al.'s results, neither team cohesion nor motivation or satisfaction is correlated with ''c''. However, they claim that three factors were found as significant correlates: the variance in the number of speaking turns, group members' average social sensitivity and the proportion of females. All three had similar predictive power for ''c'', but only social sensitivity was statistically significant (b=0.33, P=0.05).<ref name=":0" />
Individual intelligence is shown to be genetically and environmentally influenced. Analogously, collective intelligence research aims to explore reasons why certain groups perform more intelligent than other groups given that c is just moderately correlated with the intelligence of individual group members. According to Woolley et al.'s results, neither team cohesion nor motivation or satisfaction is correlated with c. However, they claim that three factors were found as significant correlates: the variance in the number of speaking turns, group members' average social sensitivity and the proportion of females. All three had similar predictive power for c, but only social sensitivity was statistically significant (b=0.33, P=0.05).
个人的智力被证明受到遗传和环境的影响。类似地，集体智力研究的目的是探索为什么某些群体比其他群体表现得更聪明，因为 c 只是与个体群体成员的智力适度相关。根据伍利等人的研究。研究结果表明，团队凝聚力、团队动机和团队满意度与 c 均无相关性，但有三个因素显著相关: 说话次数的差异、团队成员的平均社会敏感度和女性比例。三者对 c 的预测能力相似，但只有社会敏感性具有统计学意义(b0.33，p0.05)。
The number speaking turns indicates that "groups where a few people dominated the conversation were less collectively intelligent than those with a more equal distribution of conversational turn-taking".<ref name=":4" /> Hence, providing multiple team members the chance to speak up made a group more intelligent.<ref name=":0" />
The number speaking turns indicates that "groups where a few people dominated the conversation were less collectively intelligent than those with a more equal distribution of conversational turn-taking". Hence, providing multiple team members the chance to speak up made a group more intelligent.
话轮转换的数字表明，“少数人主导谈话的群体，其总体智商要低于那些话轮转换分布更均衡的群体”。因此，为多个团队成员提供畅所欲言的机会会让一个团队变得更聪明。
Group members' social sensitivity was measured via the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal|vauthors=Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Hill J, Raste Y, Plumb I |date=2001|title=The ''Reading the Mind in the Eyes'' Test revised version: a study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism|url=|journal=Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry |volume=42 |issue=2|pages=241–251|doi=10.1017/s0021963001006643|pmid=}}</ref> (RME) and correlated .26 with ''c''.<ref name=":0" /> Hereby, participants are asked to detect thinking or feeling expressed in other peoples' eyes presented on pictures and assessed in a multiple choice format. The test aims to measure peoples' [[Theory of mind|theory of mind (ToM)]], also called 'mentalizing'<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Apperly|first=Ian A.|date=2012-05-01|title=What is "theory of mind"? Concepts, cognitive processes and individual differences|journal=The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology|volume=65|issue=5|pages=825–839|doi=10.1080/17470218.2012.676055|pmid=22533318}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Baron-Cohen | first1 = Simon | last2 = Leslie | first2 = Alan M. | last3 = Frith | first3 = Uta | title = Does the autistic child have a "theory of mind"? | journal = [[Cognition (journal)|Cognition]] | volume = 21 | issue = 1 | pages = 37–46 | doi = 10.1016/0010-0277(85)90022-8 | pmid = 2934210 | date = October 1985 | ref = harv }} [https://web.archive.org/web/20170928145836/http://ruccs.rutgers.edu/images/personal-alan-leslie/publications/Baron-Cohen%20Leslie%20%26%20Frith%201985.pdf Pdf.]</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Flavell|first=J. H.|date=1999-01-01|title=Cognitive development: children's knowledge about the mind|journal=Annual Review of Psychology|volume=50|pages=21–45|doi=10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.21|pmid=10074674}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Premack|first=David|last2=Woodruff|first2=Guy|date=1978-12-01|title=Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?|url=http://journals.cambridge.org/article_S0140525X00076512|journal=Behavioral and Brain Sciences|volume=1|issue=4|pages=515–526|doi=10.1017/S0140525X00076512|doi-access=free}}</ref> or 'mind reading',<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Heyes|first=Cecilia M.|last2=Frith|first2=Chris D.|date=2014-06-20|title=The cultural evolution of mind reading|journal=Science|volume=344|issue=6190|pages=1243091|doi=10.1126/science.1243091|pmid=24948740}}</ref> which refers to the ability to attribute mental states, such as beliefs, desires or intents, to other people and in how far people understand that others have beliefs, desires, intentions or perspectives different from their own ones.<ref name=":6" /> RME is a ToM test for adults<ref name=":6" /> that shows sufficient test-retest reliability<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hallerbäck|first=Maria Unenge|last2=Lugnegård|first2=Tove|last3=Hjärthag|first3=Fredrik|last4=Gillberg|first4=Christopher|date=2009-03-01|title=The Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test: Test–retest reliability of a Swedish version|journal=Cognitive Neuropsychiatry|volume=14|issue=2|pages=127–143|doi=10.1080/13546800902901518|pmid=19370436}}</ref> and constantly differentiates control groups from individuals with functional [[autism]] or [[Asperger syndrome|Asperger Syndrome]].<ref name=":6" /> It is one of the most widely accepted and well-validated tests for ToM within adults.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Pinkham|first=Amy E.|last2=Penn|first2=David L.|last3=Green|first3=Michael F.|last4=Buck|first4=Benjamin|last5=Healey|first5=Kristin|last6=Harvey|first6=Philip D.|date=2014-07-01|title=The Social Cognition Psychometric Evaluation Study: Results of the Expert Survey and RAND Panel|url=http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/4/813|journal=Schizophrenia Bulletin|volume=40|issue=4|pages=813–823|doi=10.1093/schbul/sbt081|pmc=4059426|pmid=23728248}}</ref> ToM can be regarded as an associated subset of skills and abilities within the broader concept of [[emotional intelligence]].<ref name=":4" /><ref name="Yip 48–55">{{Cite journal|last=Yip|first=Jeremy A.|last2=Côté|first2=Stéphane|date=2013-01-01|title=The Emotionally Intelligent Decision Maker Emotion-Understanding Ability Reduces the Effect of Incidental Anxiety on Risk Taking|journal=Psychological Science|volume=24|issue=1|pages=48–55|doi=10.1177/0956797612450031|pmid=23221020}}</ref>
Group members' social sensitivity was measured via the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RME) and correlated .26 with c. or 'mind reading', which refers to the ability to attribute mental states, such as beliefs, desires or intents, to other people and in how far people understand that others have beliefs, desires, intentions or perspectives different from their own ones. and constantly differentiates control groups from individuals with functional autism or Asperger Syndrome. ToM can be regarded as an associated subset of skills and abilities within the broader concept of emotional intelligence.
团队成员的社会敏感度是通过阅读心灵的眼睛测试(RME)测量和相关。26与 c 或“心灵阅读” ，这是指能够将心理状态，如信念，欲望或意图，归因于其他人，以及人们在多大程度上理解他人的信念，欲望，意图或观点与自己的不同。并不断地将对照组与功能性自闭症或阿斯伯格综合征患者区分开来。心理理论可以被看作是情商这一更广泛概念中的一个相关的技能和能力子集。
The proportion of females as a predictor of ''c'' was '''largely mediated by social sensitivity ([[Sobel test|Sobel]] z = 1.93, P= 0.03)'''<ref name=":0" /> which is in vein with previous research showing that women score higher on social sensitivity tests.<ref name=":6" /> While a [[Mediation (statistics)|mediation]], statistically speaking, clarifies the mechanism underlying the relationship between a dependent and an independent variable,<ref>{{Cite book|title=Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis|last=MacKinnon, D. P.|publisher=Erlbaum|year=2008|isbn=|location=New York, NY|pages=}}</ref> Wolley agreed in an interview with the ''[[Harvard Business Review]]'' that these findings are '''saying that groups of women are smarter than groups of men'''.<ref name=":7" /> However, she relativizes this stating that the actual important thing is the high social sensitivity of group members.<ref name=":7" />
The proportion of females as a predictor of c was largely mediated by social sensitivity (Sobel z = 1.93, P= 0.03) Wolley agreed in an interview with the Harvard Business Review that these findings are saying that groups of women are smarter than groups of men. However, she relativizes this stating that the actual important thing is the high social sensitivity of group members.
在《哈佛商业评论》的一次采访中，沃利同意这一观点: 这些研究结果表明，女性群体比男性群体更聪明。然而，她相对地说，真正重要的是团队成员的高度社会敏感性。
It is theorized that the collective intelligence factor ''c'' is an emergent property resulting from bottom-up as well as top-down processes.<ref name=":11">{{Cite journal|last=Woolley|first=Anita Williams|last2=Aggarwal|first2=Ishani|last3=Malone|first3=Thomas W.|date=2015-12-01|title=Collective Intelligence and Group Performance|journal=Current Directions in Psychological Science|volume=24|issue=6|pages=420–424|doi=10.1177/0963721415599543}}</ref> Hereby, bottom-up processes cover aggregated group-member characteristics. Top-down processes cover group structures and norms that influence a group's way of collaborating and coordinating.<ref name=":11" />
It is theorized that the collective intelligence factor c is an emergent property resulting from bottom-up as well as top-down processes. Hereby, bottom-up processes cover aggregated group-member characteristics. Top-down processes cover group structures and norms that influence a group's way of collaborating and coordinating.
集体智力因素 c 是自下而上和自上而下过程共同作用的产物。据此，自底向上的过程涵盖了聚集的群成员特征。自上而下的过程包括影响团队合作和协调方式的团队结构和规范。
=== Processes ===
[[File:Causes for c.png|thumb|Predictors for the collective intelligence factor ''c''. Suggested by Woolley, Aggarwal & Malone<ref name=":11"/> (2015)]]
Predictors for the collective intelligence factor c. Suggested by Woolley, Aggarwal & Malone (2015)
集体智慧因子 c 的预测因子，由 Woolley，Aggarwal & Malone (2015)提出
==== Top-down processes ====
Top-down processes cover group interaction, such as structures, processes, and norms.<ref name="Woolley 420–424">{{Cite journal|last=Woolley|first=A. W.|last2=Aggarwal|first2=I.|last3=Malone|first3=T. W.|date=2015-12-01|title=Collective Intelligence and Group Performance|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286512331|journal=Current Directions in Psychological Science|volume=24|issue=6|pages=420–424|doi=10.1177/0963721415599543}}</ref> An example of such top-down processes is conversational turn-taking.<ref name=":0" /> Research further suggest that collectively intelligent groups communicate more in general as well as more equally; same applies for participation and is shown for face-to-face as well as online groups communicating only via writing.<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":9" />
Top-down processes cover group interaction, such as structures, processes, and norms. An example of such top-down processes is conversational turn-taking. Research further suggest that collectively intelligent groups communicate more in general as well as more equally; same applies for participation and is shown for face-to-face as well as online groups communicating only via writing.
自顶向下的过程包括组交互，如结构、过程和规范。这种自顶向下流程的一个例子是会话转换。研究进一步表明，集体智慧群体的沟通更加普遍，也更加平等; 参与也是如此，表现在面对面的交流以及仅通过书面交流的在线群体上。
==== Bottom-up processes ====
Bottom-up processes include group composition,<ref name="Woolley 420–424"/> namely the characteristics of group members which are aggregated to the team level.<ref name=":11" /> An example of such bottom-up processes is the average social sensitivity or the average and maximum intelligence scores of group members.<ref name=":0" /> Furthermore, collective intelligence was found to be related to a group's cognitive diversity<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal|author1=Aggarwal, I. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Chabris, C. F. |author4= Malone, T. W. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2015|title=Cognitive diversity, collective intelligence, and learning in teams.|url=|journal=Paper Presented at the 2015 Collective Intelligence Conference, Santa Clara, CA.|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> including thinking styles and perspectives.<ref>{{Cite journal|author1=Kozhevnikov, M. |author2=Evans, C. |author3= Kosslyn, S. M. |last-author-amp=yes|date=2014|title=Cognitive style as environmentally sensitive individual differences in cognition: A modern synthesis and applications in education, business, and management|url=|journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest |volume=15 |issue=1 |pages=3–33|doi=10.1177/1529100614525555|pmid=26171827}}</ref> Groups that are moderately diverse in [[cognitive style]] have higher collective intelligence than those who are very similar in cognitive style or very different. Consequently, groups where members are too similar to each other lack the variety of perspectives and skills needed to perform well. On the other hand, groups whose members are too different seem to have difficulties to communicate and coordinate effectively.<ref name=":12" />
Bottom-up processes include group composition, including thinking styles and perspectives. Groups that are moderately diverse in cognitive style have higher collective intelligence than those who are very similar in cognitive style or very different. Consequently, groups where members are too similar to each other lack the variety of perspectives and skills needed to perform well. On the other hand, groups whose members are too different seem to have difficulties to communicate and coordinate effectively.
自下而上的过程包括群体构成，包括思维风格和观点。认知方式适度多样化的群体比认知方式非常相似或非常不同的群体有更高的集体智慧。因此，成员太相似的群体缺乏表现良好所需的各种观点和技能。另一方面，成员差异太大的群体似乎难以有效地沟通和协调。
==== Serial vs Parallel processes ====
For most of human history, collective intelligence was confined to small tribal groups in which opinions were aggregated through real-time parallel interactions among members.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Moral tribes : emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them|last=1974–|first=Greene, Joshua David|isbn=978-0143126058|oclc=871336785|date=2014-12-30|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/moraltribesemoti0000gree}}</ref> In modern times, mass communication, mass media, and networking technologies have enabled collective intelligence to span massive groups, distributed across continents and time-zones. To accommodate this shift in scale, collective intelligence in large-scale groups been dominated by serialized polling processes such as aggregating up-votes, likes, and ratings over time. While modern systems benefit from larger group size, the serialized process has been found to introduce substantial noise that distorts the collective output of the group. In one significant study of serialized collective intelligence, it was found that the first vote contributed to a serialized voting system can distort the final result by 34%.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Muchnik|first=Lev|last2=Aral|first2=Sinan|last3=Taylor|first3=Sean J.|date=2013-08-09|title=Social Influence Bias: A Randomized Experiment|journal=Science|volume=341|issue=6146|pages=647–651|doi=10.1126/science.1240466|issn=0036-8075|pmid=23929980|bibcode=2013Sci...341..647M}}</ref>
For most of human history, collective intelligence was confined to small tribal groups in which opinions were aggregated through real-time parallel interactions among members. In modern times, mass communication, mass media, and networking technologies have enabled collective intelligence to span massive groups, distributed across continents and time-zones. To accommodate this shift in scale, collective intelligence in large-scale groups been dominated by serialized polling processes such as aggregating up-votes, likes, and ratings over time. While modern systems benefit from larger group size, the serialized process has been found to introduce substantial noise that distorts the collective output of the group. In one significant study of serialized collective intelligence, it was found that the first vote contributed to a serialized voting system can distort the final result by 34%.
在人类历史的大部分时间里，集体智慧仅限于小部落群体，在这些群体中，各种意见通过成员之间的实时并行互动得到汇总。在现代，大众传播、大众媒体和网络技术使得集体智慧能够跨越大规模的群体，分布在各大洲和各个时区。为了适应这种规模上的转变，大规模群体中的集体智慧被一系列投票过程所主导，比如随着时间的推移聚合最高票数、喜欢和评分。虽然现代系统受益于更大的群体规模，已经发现序列化的过程引入了大量的噪音，扭曲了群体的集体产出。在一项关于系列化集体智慧的重要研究中，发现系列化投票系统中的第一次投票可以使最终结果失真34% 。
To address the problems of serialized aggregation of input among large-scale groups, recent advancements collective intelligence have worked to replace serialized votes, polls, and markets, with parallel systems such as "[[Swarm intelligence|human swarms]]" modeled after synchronous swarms in nature.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20161215-why-bees-could-be-the-secret-to-superhuman-intelligence|title=Why bees could be the secret to superhuman intelligence|last=Oxenham|first=Simon|access-date=2017-05-23}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Rosenberg|first=L.|last2=Baltaxe|first2=D.|last3=Pescetelli|first3=N.|date=2016-10-01|title=Crowds vs swarms, a comparison of intelligence|journal=2016 Swarm/Human Blended Intelligence Workshop (SHBI)|pages=1–4|doi=10.1109/SHBI.2016.7780278|isbn=978-1-5090-3502-1}}</ref> Based on natural process of [[Swarm Intelligence]], these artificial swarms of networked humans enable participants to work together in parallel to answer questions and make predictions as an emergent collective intelligence.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Metcalf|first=Lynn|last2=Askay|first2=David A.|last3=Rosenberg|first3=Louis B.|date=2019|title=Keeping Humans in the Loop: Pooling Knowledge through Artificial Swarm Intelligence to Improve Business Decision Making|journal=California Management Review|language=en|volume=61|issue=4|pages=84–109|doi=10.1177/0008125619862256|issn=0008-1256}}</ref> In one high-profile example, a human swarm challenge by CBS Interactive to predict the Kentucky Derby. The swarm correctly predicted the first four horses, in order, defying 542–1 odds and turning a $20 bet into $10,800.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.newsweek.com/artificial-intelligence-turns-20-11000-kentucky-derby-bet-457783|title=Artificial intelligence turns $20 into $11,000 in Kentucky Derby bet|date=2016-05-10|work=Newsweek|access-date=2017-05-23}}</ref>
To address the problems of serialized aggregation of input among large-scale groups, recent advancements collective intelligence have worked to replace serialized votes, polls, and markets, with parallel systems such as "human swarms" modeled after synchronous swarms in nature. Based on natural process of Swarm Intelligence, these artificial swarms of networked humans enable participants to work together in parallel to answer questions and make predictions as an emergent collective intelligence. In one high-profile example, a human swarm challenge by CBS Interactive to predict the Kentucky Derby. The swarm correctly predicted the first four horses, in order, defying 542–1 odds and turning a $20 bet into $10,800.
为了解决大规模群体之间连续集合输入的问题，最近的进展集体智慧致力于用类似“人类群体”的并行系统取代连续投票、投票和市场，这些系统是仿照自然界的同步群体建立的。基于群体智能的自然过程，这些网络化的人类群使得参与者能够并行工作回答问题，并作为一个新兴的集体智慧进行预测。在一个引人注目的例子中，哥伦比亚广播公司互动公司(CBS Interactive)发起了一场群体挑战赛，来预测肯塔基赛马会。蜂群正确地预测了前四匹马，排序，排除了542-1的赔率，把20美元的赌注变成了10800美元。
The value of parallel collective intelligence was demonstrated in medical applications by researchers at [[Stanford University School of Medicine]] and [[Unanimous A.I.|Unanimous AI]] in a set of published studies wherein groups of human doctors were connected by real-time swarming algorithms and tasked with diagnosing chest x-rays for the presence of pneumonia.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-human-os/biomedical/diagnostics/ai-human-hive-mind-diagnoses-pneumonia|title=AI-Human "Hive Mind" Diagnoses Pneumonia|last=Scudellari|first=Megan|date=2018-09-13|website=IEEE Spectrum: Technology, Engineering, and Science News|access-date=2019-07-20}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.stanforddaily.com/2018/09/27/artificial-swarm-intelligence-diagnoses-pneumonia-better-than-individual-computer-or-doctor/|title=Artificial swarm intelligence diagnoses pneumonia better than individual computer or doctor|last=Liu|first=Fan|date=2018-09-27|website=The Stanford Daily|access-date=2019-07-20}}</ref> When working together as "human swarms," the groups of experienced radiologists demonstrated a 33% reduction in diagnostic errors as compared to traditional methods.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.radiologytoday.net/archive/rt0119p12.shtml|title=A Swarm of Insight - Radiology Today Magazine|website=www.radiologytoday.net|access-date=2019-07-20}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rosenberg|first=Louis|last2=Lungren|first2=Matthew|last3=Halabi|first3=Safwan|last4=Willcox|first4=Gregg|last5=Baltaxe|first5=David|last6=Lyons|first6=Mimi|date=November 2018|title=Artificial Swarm Intelligence employed to Amplify Diagnostic Accuracy in Radiology|journal=2018 IEEE 9th Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON)|location=Vancouver, BC|publisher=IEEE|pages=1186–1191|doi=10.1109/IEMCON.2018.8614883|isbn=9781538672662}}</ref>
The value of parallel collective intelligence was demonstrated in medical applications by researchers at Stanford University School of Medicine and Unanimous AI in a set of published studies wherein groups of human doctors were connected by real-time swarming algorithms and tasked with diagnosing chest x-rays for the presence of pneumonia. When working together as "human swarms," the groups of experienced radiologists demonstrated a 33% reduction in diagnostic errors as compared to traditional methods.
斯坦福大学医学院(Stanford University School of Medicine)的研究人员和人工智能领域的研究人员在一系列已发表的研究中证明了平行集体智能的价值，在这些研究中，一群群的人类医生通过实时的群集算法相互联系，并负责诊断肺炎的胸部 x 光片。当作为“人群”一起工作时，这些经验丰富的放射学家小组证明，与传统方法相比，诊断错误减少了33% 。
=== Evidence ===
[[File:Standardized Regression Coefficients.png|alt=Standardized Regression Coefficients for the collective intelligence factor ''c'' and group member intelligence regressed on the two criterion tasks as found in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies.|thumb|Standardized Regression Coefficients for the collective intelligence factor ''c'' as found in Woolley et al.'s<ref name=":0"/> (2010) two original studies. ''c'' and average (maximum) member intelligence scores are regressed on the criterion tasks.]]
Standardized Regression Coefficients for the collective intelligence factor c as found in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies. c and average (maximum) member intelligence scores are regressed on the criterion tasks.
集体智力因子 c 的标准化回归系数在伍利等人发现。的(2010)两个原始研究。C 和平均(最大)成员智力得分回归于标准任务。
Woolley, Chabris, Pentland, Hashmi, & Malone (2010),<ref name=":0" /> the originators of this scientific understanding of collective intelligence, found a single statistical factor for collective intelligence in their research across 192 groups with people randomly recruited from the public. In Woolley et al.'s two initial studies, groups worked together on different tasks from the [[The Circumplex Model of Group Tasks|McGrath Task Circumplex]],<ref>{{Cite book|title=Groups: Interaction and Performance|last=McGrath, J. E.|publisher=Prentice-Hall|year=1984|isbn=|location=Englewood Cliffs, NJ|pages=}}</ref> a well-established taxonomy of group tasks. Tasks were chosen from all four quadrants of the circumplex and included visual puzzles, brainstorming, making collective moral judgments, and negotiating over limited resources. The results in these tasks were taken to conduct a [[factor analysis]]. Both studies showed support for a general collective intelligence factor ''c'' underlying differences in group performance with an initial eigenvalue accounting for 43% (44% in study 2) of the variance, whereas the next factor accounted for only 18% (20%). That fits the range normally found in research regarding a [[G factor (psychometrics)|general individual intelligence factor ''g'']] typically accounting for 40% to 50% percent of between-individual performance differences on cognitive tests.<ref name=":5" />
Woolley, Chabris, Pentland, Hashmi, & Malone (2010), a well-established taxonomy of group tasks. Tasks were chosen from all four quadrants of the circumplex and included visual puzzles, brainstorming, making collective moral judgments, and negotiating over limited resources. The results in these tasks were taken to conduct a factor analysis. Both studies showed support for a general collective intelligence factor c underlying differences in group performance with an initial eigenvalue accounting for 43% (44% in study 2) of the variance, whereas the next factor accounted for only 18% (20%). That fits the range normally found in research regarding a general individual intelligence factor g typically accounting for 40% to 50% percent of between-individual performance differences on cognitive tests.
Woolley，Chabris，彭特兰，Hashmi，& Malone (2010) ，一个完善的分类组任务。任务从复杂的四个象限中选择，包括视觉谜题、头脑风暴、做出集体道德判断以及在有限的资源上进行谈判。对这些任务的结果进行因子分析。两项研究都表明支持一般集体智力因素 c，在群体绩效的潜在差异中，最初的特征值占方差的43% (研究2中为44%) ，而下一个因素只占18% (20%)。这符合研究中通常发现的范围，一般个人智力因素 g 通常占认知测试中个人表现差异的40% 至50% 。
Afterwards, a more complex criterion task was absolved by each group measuring whether the extracted ''c'' factor had predictive power for performance outside the original task batteries. Criterion tasks were playing [[Draughts|checkers (draughts)]] against a standardized computer in the first and a complex architectural design task in the second study. In a [[regression analysis]] using both individual intelligence of group members and ''c'' to predict performance on the criterion tasks, ''c'' had a significant effect, but average and maximum individual intelligence had not. While average (r=0.15, P=0.04) and maximum intelligence (r=0.19, P=0.008) of individual group members were moderately correlated with ''c'', ''c'' was still a much better predictor of the criterion tasks. According to Woolley et al., this supports the existence of a collective intelligence factor ''c,'' because it demonstrates an effect over and beyond group members' individual intelligence and thus that ''c'' is more than just the aggregation of the individual IQs or the influence of the group member with the highest IQ.<ref name=":0" />
Afterwards, a more complex criterion task was absolved by each group measuring whether the extracted c factor had predictive power for performance outside the original task batteries. Criterion tasks were playing checkers (draughts) against a standardized computer in the first and a complex architectural design task in the second study. In a regression analysis using both individual intelligence of group members and c to predict performance on the criterion tasks, c had a significant effect, but average and maximum individual intelligence had not. While average (r=0.15, P=0.04) and maximum intelligence (r=0.19, P=0.008) of individual group members were moderately correlated with c, c was still a much better predictor of the criterion tasks. According to Woolley et al., this supports the existence of a collective intelligence factor c, because it demonstrates an effect over and beyond group members' individual intelligence and thus that c is more than just the aggregation of the individual IQs or the influence of the group member with the highest IQ.
然后，一个更复杂的标准任务被免除，每组测量提取的 c 因子是否对原任务电池之外的性能有预测能力。标准任务是下棋(跳棋)对标准计算机在第一个和复杂的建筑设计任务在第二个研究。在同时使用小组成员的个人智力和 c 来预测标准任务的表现的回归分析中，c 有显著的效果，但是平均和最大的个人智力没有。各组成员的平均智力(r0.15，p0.04)和最高智力(r0.19，p0.008)与 c 有中度相关，但 c 仍是标准任务的较好预测因子。根据 Woolley 等人的研究，这支持了集体智力因素 c 的存在，因为它证明了一种超越团队成员个人智力的影响，因此 c 不仅仅是个人智商的集合或者智商最高的团队成员的影响。
Engel et al.<ref name=":4" /> (2014) replicated Woolley et al.'s findings applying an accelerated battery of tasks with a first factor in the factor analysis explaining 49% of the between-group variance in performance with the following factors explaining less than half of this amount. Moreover, they found a similar result for groups working together online communicating only via text and confirmed the role of female proportion and social sensitivity in causing collective intelligence in both cases. Similarly to Wolley et al.,<ref name=":0" /> they also measured social sensitivity with the RME which is actually meant to measure people's ability to detect mental states in other peoples' eyes. The online collaborating participants, however, did neither know nor see each other at all. The authors conclude that scores on the RME must be related to a broader set of abilities of social reasoning than only drawing inferences from other people's eye expressions.<ref name=":13">{{Cite book|last=Engel|first=David|last2=Woolley|first2=Anita Williams|last3=Aggarwal|first3=Ishani|last4=Chabris|first4=Christopher F.|last5=Takahashi|first5=Masamichi|last6=Nemoto|first6=Keiichi|last7=Kaiser|first7=Carolin|last8=Kim|first8=Young Ji|last9=Malone|first9=Thomas W.|date=2015-01-01|title=Collective Intelligence in Computer-Mediated Collaboration Emerges in Different Contexts and Cultures|journal=Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems|series=CHI '15|location=New York, NY, USA|publisher=ACM|pages=3769–3778|doi=10.1145/2702123.2702259|isbn=9781450331456}}</ref>
Engel et al.
Engel et al.
A collective intelligence factor ''c'' in the sense of Woolley et al.<ref name=":0" /> was further found in groups of MBA students working together over the course of a semester,<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal|author1=Aggarwal, I. |author2= Woolley, A.W. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2014|title=The effects of cognitive diversity on collective intelligence and team learning.|url=|journal=Symposium Presented at the 50th Meeting of the Society of Experimental Social Psychology, Columbus, OH.|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> in online gaming groups<ref name=":9">{{Cite journal|author1=Kim, Y. J. |author2=Engel, D. |author3=Woolley, A. W. |author4=Lin, J. |author5=McArthur, N. |author6= Malone, T. W. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2015|title=Work together, play smart: Collective intelligence in League of Legends teams|url=|journal=Paper Presented at the 2015 Collective Intelligence Conference, Santa Clara, CA.|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> as well as in groups from different cultures<ref name=":10">{{Cite journal|author1=Engel, D. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Aggarwal, I. |author4=Chabris, C. F. |author5=Takahashi, M. |author6=Nemoto, K. |author7=Malone, T. W. |date=2015|title=Collective intelligence in computer-mediates collaboration emerges in different contexts and cultures.|url=https://dl.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=2702259&type=pdf|journal=In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15) (Pp. 3769–3778). New York, NY: ACM|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> and groups in different contexts in terms of short-term versus long-term groups.<ref name=":10" /> None of these investigations considered team members' individual intelligence scores as control variables.<ref name=":9" /><ref name=":8" /><ref name=":10" />
A collective intelligence factor c in the sense of Woolley et al. in online gaming groups as well as in groups from different cultures and groups in different contexts in terms of short-term versus long-term groups. None of these investigations considered team members' individual intelligence scores as control variables.
一个集体智慧因素 c 的意义，伍利等人。以及来自不同文化和群体的不同背景下的短期群体和长期群体。这些调查都没有将团队成员的个人智力分数作为控制变量。
Note as well that the field of collective intelligence research is quite young and published empirical evidence is relatively rare yet. However, various proposals and working papers are in progress or already completed but (supposedly) still in a [[scholarly peer review]]ing publication process.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sites.google.com/a/stern.nyu.edu/collective-intelligence-conference/|title=Collective Intelligence 2016|website=sites.google.com|access-date=2016-04-27}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/collectiveintelligence/posters/|title=Posters {{!}} Collective Intelligence 2015|website=sites.lsa.umich.edu|access-date=2016-04-27}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://collective.mech.northwestern.edu/?page_id=217|title=Proceedings {{!}} Collective Intelligence 2014|website=collective.mech.northwestern.edu|access-date=2016-04-27}}</ref><ref>{{Cite arxiv|eprint=1204.2991|last1= Malone|first1= Thomas W.|title= Collective Intelligence 2012: Proceedings|author2= Luis von Ahn|class= cs.SI|year= 2012}}</ref>
Note as well that the field of collective intelligence research is quite young and published empirical evidence is relatively rare yet. However, various proposals and working papers are in progress or already completed but (supposedly) still in a scholarly peer reviewing publication process.
还要注意的是，集体智慧研究领域相当年轻，而且在21经验证明发表的论文相对较少。然而，各种建议和工作文件正在进行中或已经完成，但(据推测)仍在学术同行评审出版过程中。
=== Predictive validity ===
Next to predicting a group's performance on more complex criterion tasks as shown in the original experiments,<ref name=":0" /> the collective intelligence factor ''c'' was also found to predict group performance in diverse tasks in MBA classes lasting over several months.<ref name=":8" /> Thereby, highly collectively intelligent groups earned significantly higher scores on their group assignments although their members did not do any better on other individually performed assignments. Moreover, highly collective intelligent teams improved performance over time suggesting that more collectively intelligent teams learn better.<ref name=":8" /> This is another potential parallel to individual intelligence where more intelligent people are found to acquire new material quicker.<ref name=":2" /><ref>{{Cite journal|author1=Schmidt, F.L. |author2= Hunter, J.E. |last-author-amp=yes |date=1998|title=The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings|url=|journal=Psychological Bulletin |volume=124 |issue= 2 |pages=262–274|doi=10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262|pmid=|citeseerx= 10.1.1.172.1733 }}</ref>
Next to predicting a group's performance on more complex criterion tasks as shown in the original experiments,
除了预测一组人在更复杂的标准任务上的表现，如原始实验所示,
Individual intelligence can be used to predict plenty of life outcomes from school attainment<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Nathan, B.|date=1997|title=Intelligence, Schooling, and Society|url=|journal=American Psychologist |volume=52 |issue=10 |pages=1046–1050|doi=10.1037/0003-066x.52.10.1046}}</ref> and career success<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Strenze|first=Tarmo|date=2007-09-01|title=Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal research|journal=Intelligence|volume=35|issue=5|pages=401–426|doi=10.1016/j.intell.2006.09.004}}</ref> to health outcomes<ref name=":14">{{Cite journal|author1=Deary, I.J. |author2=Weiss, A. |author3= Batty, D.G. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2010|title=Intelligence and Personality as Predictors of Illness and Death. How Researchers in Differential Psychology and Chronic Disease Epidemiology Are Collaborating to Understand and Address Health Inequalities|journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest |volume=11 |issue=2 |pages= 53–79|doi=10.1177/1529100610387081|pmid=26168413|hdl=20.500.11820/134d66d9-98db-447a-a8b2-5b019b96a7bb |url=https://www.pure.ed.ac.uk/ws/files/8895401/intelligence_and_personality_as_predictors.pdf }}</ref> and even mortality.<ref name=":14" /> Whether collective intelligence is able to predict other outcomes besides group performance on mental tasks has still to be investigated.
Individual intelligence can be used to predict plenty of life outcomes from school attainment and career success to health outcomes and even mortality. Whether collective intelligence is able to predict other outcomes besides group performance on mental tasks has still to be investigated.
个人智力可以用来预测大量的生活结果，从学业成就、事业成功到健康结果，甚至死亡率。集体智力是否能够预测智力任务群体表现以外的其他结果还有待研究。
=== Potential connections to individual intelligence ===
Gladwell<ref>{{Cite book|title=Outliers. The Story of Success|last=Gladwell, M.|publisher=Little, Brown and Company|year=2008|isbn=978-0-316-01792-3|location=New York, NY|pages=|url=https://archive.org/details/outliersstoryofs00glad}}</ref> (2008) showed that the relationship between individual IQ and success works only to a certain point and that additional IQ points over an estimate of IQ 120 do not translate into real life advantages. If a similar border exists for Group-IQ or if advantages are linear and infinite, has still to be explored. Similarly, demand for further research on possible connections of individual and collective intelligence exists within plenty of other potentially transferable logics of individual intelligence, such as, for instance, the development over time<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hedden|first=Trey|last2=Gabrieli|first2=John D. E.|date=2004-02-01|title=Insights into the ageing mind: a view from cognitive neuroscience|journal=Nature Reviews. Neuroscience|volume=5|issue=2|pages=87–96|doi=10.1038/nrn1323|pmid=14735112}}</ref> or the question of improving intelligence.<ref name=":15">{{Cite journal|last=Shipstead|first=Zach|last2=Redick|first2=Thomas S|last3=Engle|first3=Randall W.|date=2010-10-01|title=Does working memory training generalize?|journal=Psychologica Belgica|volume=50|issue=3–4|doi=10.5334/pb-50-3-4-245|pages=245|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":16">{{Cite journal|author1=Buschkuehl, M. |author2=Jaeggi, S.M.|date=2010|title=Improving intelligence a literature review|url=|journal=Swiss Medical Weekly |volume=140 |issue=19 |pages=266–72|doi=|pmid=20349365}}</ref> Whereas it is controversial whether human intelligence can be enhanced via training,<ref name=":15" /><ref name=":16" /> a group's collective intelligence potentially offers simpler opportunities for improvement by exchanging team members or implementing structures and technologies.<ref name=":7" /> Moreover, social sensitivity was found to be, at least temporarily, improvable by reading [[literary fiction]]<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kidd|first=David Comer|last2=Castano|first2=Emanuele|date=2013-10-18|title=Reading Literary Fiction Improves Theory of Mind|journal=Science|volume=342|issue=6156|pages=377–380|doi=10.1126/science.1239918|pmid=24091705|bibcode=2013Sci...342..377K}}</ref> as well as watching drama movies.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Black|first=Jessica|last2=Barnes|first2=Jennifer L.|title=Fiction and social cognition: The effect of viewing award-winning television dramas on theory of mind|journal=Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts|volume=9|issue=4|pages=423–429|doi=10.1037/aca0000031|year=2015}}</ref> In how far such training ultimately improves collective intelligence through social sensitivity remains an open question.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Handbook of Collective Intelligence|author1=Malone, T. W. |author2= Bernstein, M.S. |last-author-amp=yes |publisher=MIT Press|year=2015|isbn=|location=Cambridge, MA|pages=}}</ref>
Gladwell (2008) showed that the relationship between individual IQ and success works only to a certain point and that additional IQ points over an estimate of IQ 120 do not translate into real life advantages. If a similar border exists for Group-IQ or if advantages are linear and infinite, has still to be explored. Similarly, demand for further research on possible connections of individual and collective intelligence exists within plenty of other potentially transferable logics of individual intelligence, such as, for instance, the development over time or the question of improving intelligence. Whereas it is controversial whether human intelligence can be enhanced via training, as well as watching drama movies. In how far such training ultimately improves collective intelligence through social sensitivity remains an open question.
格拉德威尔(2008)指出，个人智商和成功之间的关系只在一定程度上起作用，超过估计智商120的额外智商点不会转化为现实生活中的优势。如果类似的边界存在的群体智商或如果优势是线性和无限的，仍然有待探索。类似地，对于个体和集体智慧之间可能存在的联系的进一步研究的需求存在于大量其他个体智慧的潜在可转移逻辑中，例如，随着时间的推移的发展或者提高智力的问题。然而，是否可以通过训练和观看戏剧电影来提高人类的智力却是一个有争议的问题。在多大程度上这种培训最终通过社会敏感性提高集体智慧仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。
There are further more advanced concepts and factor models attempting to explain individual cognitive ability including the categorization of intelligence in [[fluid and crystallized intelligence]]<ref>{{Cite book|title=Models of intelligence. In R.L. Linn (Ed.), Intelligence: Measurement, theory, and public policy (pp. 29–73).|last=Horn, J.|publisher=University of Illinois Press.|year=1989|isbn=|location=Urbana, IL|pages=}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action.|last=Cattell, R. B.|publisher=New York, NY|year=1971|isbn=|location=Houghton Mifflin|pages=}}</ref> or the [[Three-stratum theory|hierarchical model of intelligence differences]].<ref>{{Cite book|title=Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies.|last=Carroll, J.B.|publisher=Cambridge University Press.|year=1993|isbn=9780521387125|location=Cambridge, England|pages=|url=https://books.google.com/?id=jp9dt4_0_cIC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Johnson|first=Wendy|last2=Bouchard Jr.|first2=Thomas J.|date=2005-07-01|title=The structure of human intelligence: It is verbal, perceptual, and image rotation (VPR), not fluid and crystallized|journal=Intelligence|volume=33|issue=4|pages=393–416|doi=10.1016/j.intell.2004.12.002}}</ref> Further supplementing explanations and conceptualizations for the factor structure of the '''Genomes''' of collective intelligence besides a general {{'}}''c'' factor', though, are missing yet.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://cci.mit.edu/research_developing.html|title=MIT Center for Collective Intelligence|website=cci.mit.edu|access-date=2016-04-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160330091237/http://cci.mit.edu/research_developing.html|archive-date=30 March 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref>
There are further more advanced concepts and factor models attempting to explain individual cognitive ability including the categorization of intelligence in fluid and crystallized intelligence or the hierarchical model of intelligence differences. Further supplementing explanations and conceptualizations for the factor structure of the Genomes of collective intelligence besides a general c factor', though, are missing yet.
还有更进一步的更先进的概念和因素模型试图解释个体的认知能力，包括晶体智力的智力分类或智力差异的层次模型。然而，除了一般的 c 因子之外，对集体智慧基因组的因子结构的进一步解释和概念化仍然缺失。
=== Controversies ===
Other scholars explain team performance by aggregating team members' general intelligence to the team level<ref>{{Cite journal|last=LePine|first=Jeffery A.|title=Adaptation of Teams in Response to Unforeseen Change: Effects of Goal Difficulty and Team Composition in Terms of Cognitive Ability and Goal Orientation|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=90|issue=6|pages=1153–1167|doi=10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1153|year=2005|pmid=16316271}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Tziner|first=Aharon|last2=Eden|first2=Dov|title=Effects of crew composition on crew performance: Does the whole equal the sum of its parts?|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=70|issue=1|pages=85–93|doi=10.1037/0021-9010.70.1.85|year=1985}}</ref> instead of building an own overall collective intelligence measure. Devine and Philips<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Devine|first=Dennis J.|last2=Philips|first2=Jennifer L.|date=2001-10-01|title=Do Smarter Teams Do Better A Meta-Analysis of Cognitive Ability and Team Performance|journal=Small Group Research|volume=32|issue=5|pages=507–532|doi=10.1177/104649640103200501}}</ref> (2001) showed in a meta-analysis that mean cognitive ability predicts team performance in laboratory settings (.37) as well as field settings (.14) – note that this is only a small effect. Suggesting a strong dependence on the relevant tasks, other scholars showed that tasks requiring a high degree of communication and cooperation are found to be most influenced by the team member with the lowest cognitive ability.<ref>{{Cite journal|author1=O'Brien, G. |author2=Owens, A.|date=1969|title=Effects of organizational structure on correlations between member abilities and group productivity|url=|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology |volume=53 |issue=6|pages=525–530|doi=10.1037/h0028659|pmid=}}</ref> Tasks in which selecting the best team member is the most successful strategy, are shown to be most influenced by the member with the highest cognitive ability.<ref name="Yip 48–55"/>
Other scholars explain team performance by aggregating team members' general intelligence to the team level instead of building an own overall collective intelligence measure. Devine and Philips (2001) showed in a meta-analysis that mean cognitive ability predicts team performance in laboratory settings (.37) as well as field settings (.14) – note that this is only a small effect. Suggesting a strong dependence on the relevant tasks, other scholars showed that tasks requiring a high degree of communication and cooperation are found to be most influenced by the team member with the lowest cognitive ability. Tasks in which selecting the best team member is the most successful strategy, are shown to be most influenced by the member with the highest cognitive ability.
其他学者通过将团队成员的一般智力汇总到团队水平来解释团队表现，而不是建立一个自己的整体集体智力测量。Devine 和 Philips (2001)在一项荟萃分析中指出，认知能力可以预测实验室环境(0.37)和现场环境(0.14)下的团队表现。注意，这只是一个很小的影响。其他学者的研究表明，对相关任务的依赖性较强，需要高度沟通与合作的任务被认知能力最低的团队成员影响最大。选择最好的团队成员是最成功的策略的任务，被证明受认知能力最高的成员的影响最大。
Since Woolley et al.'s<ref name=":0" /> results do not show any influence of group satisfaction, [[group cohesiveness]], or motivation, they, at least implicitly, challenge these concepts regarding the importance for group performance in general and thus contrast meta-analytically proven evidence concerning the positive effects of [[Group cohesiveness|group cohesion]],<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Evans|first=Charles R.|last2=Dion|first2=Kenneth L.|date=1991-05-01|title=Group Cohesion and Performance A Meta-Analysis|journal=Small Group Research|volume=22|issue=2|pages=175–186|doi=10.1177/1046496491222002}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Gully|first=Stanley M.|last2=Devine|first2=Dennis J.|last3=Whitney|first3=David J.|date=2012-12-01|title=A Meta-Analysis of Cohesion and Performance Effects of Level of Analysis and Task Interdependence|journal=Small Group Research|volume=43|issue=6|pages=702–725|doi=10.1177/1046496412468069}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Beal|first=Daniel J.|last2=Cohen|first2=Robin R.|last3=Burke|first3=Michael J.|last4=McLendon|first4=Christy L.|title=Cohesion and Performance in Groups: A Meta-Analytic Clarification of Construct Relations.|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=88|issue=6|pages=989–1004|doi=10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.989|pmid=14640811|date=December 2003}}</ref> motivation<ref>{{Cite journal|last=O'leary-kelly|first=Anne M.|last2=Martocchio|first2=Joseph J.|last3=Frink|first3=Dwight D.|date=1994-10-01|title=A Review of the Influence of Group Goals on Group Performance|url=http://amj.aom.org/content/37/5/1285|journal=Academy of Management Journal|volume=37|issue=5|pages=1285–1301|doi=10.2307/256673|jstor=256673}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kleingeld|first=Ad|last2=Mierlo|first2=Heleen van|last3=Arends|first3=Lidia|title=The effect of goal setting on group performance: A meta-analysis|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=96|issue=6|pages=1289–1304|doi=10.1037/a0024315|pmid=21744940|year=2011}}</ref> and satisfaction<ref>{{Cite journal|author1=Duffy, M. K. |author2=Shaw, J. D. |author3= Stark, E. M. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2000|title=Performance and satisfaction in conflicted interdependent groups: When and how does selfesteem make a difference?|url=|journal=Academy of Management Journal |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=772–782|doi=10.2307/1556367|pmid=|jstor=1556367 }}</ref> on group performance.
Since Woolley et al.'s motivation and satisfaction on group performance.
自从伍利等人。动机和满意度对团队绩效的影响。
Noteworthy is also that the involved researchers among the confirming findings widely overlap with each other and with the authors participating in the original first study around Anita Woolley.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":11"/><ref name=":11" /><ref name=":4" /><ref name=":12" /><ref name=":13" />
Noteworthy is also that the involved researchers among the confirming findings widely overlap with each other and with the authors participating in the original first study around Anita Woolley.
值得注意的是，参与研究的研究人员在确认研究结果时，彼此之间以及参与最初围绕安妮塔 · 伍利进行的第一次研究的作者之间都有广泛的重叠。
== Alternative mathematical techniques ==
=== Computational collective intelligence ===
[[File:Computational collective intelligence.jpg|thumb|Computational Collective Intelligence, by Tadeusz Szuba]]
Computational Collective Intelligence, by Tadeusz Szuba
计算集体智慧，作者: Tadeusz Szuba
In 2001, Tadeusz (Tad) Szuba from the [[Akademia Górniczo-Hutnicza|AGH University]] in Poland proposed a formal model for the phenomenon of collective intelligence. It is assumed to be an unconscious, random, parallel, and distributed computational process, run in mathematical logic by the social structure.<ref name="szuba">Szuba T., ''Computational Collective Intelligence'', 420 pages, Wiley NY, 2001</ref>
In 2001, Tadeusz (Tad) Szuba from the AGH University in Poland proposed a formal model for the phenomenon of collective intelligence. It is assumed to be an unconscious, random, parallel, and distributed computational process, run in mathematical logic by the social structure.
2001年，波兰 AGH 大学的 Tadeusz (Tad) Szuba 提出了集体智慧现象的正式模型。它被认为是一个无意识的、随机的、平行的、分布式的计算过程，通过社会结构在数理逻辑中运行。
In this model, beings and information are modeled as abstract information molecules carrying expressions of mathematical logic.<ref name="szuba" /> They are quasi-randomly displacing due to their interaction with their environments with their intended displacements.<ref name="szuba" /> Their interaction in abstract computational space creates multi-thread inference process which we perceive as collective intelligence.<ref name="szuba" /> Thus, a non-[[Alan Turing|Turing]] model of computation is used. This theory allows simple formal definition of collective intelligence as the property of [[social structure]] and seems to be working well for a wide spectrum of beings, from bacterial colonies up to human social structures. Collective intelligence considered as a specific computational process is providing a straightforward explanation of several social phenomena. For this model of collective intelligence, the formal definition of IQS (IQ Social) was proposed and was defined as "the probability function over the time and domain of N-element inferences which are reflecting inference activity of the social structure".<ref name="szuba" /> While IQS seems to be computationally hard, modeling of social structure in terms of a computational process as described above gives a chance for approximation.<ref name="szuba" /> Prospective applications are optimization of companies through the maximization of their IQS, and the analysis of drug resistance against collective intelligence of bacterial colonies.<ref name="szuba"/>
In this model, beings and information are modeled as abstract information molecules carrying expressions of mathematical logic. They are quasi-randomly displacing due to their interaction with their environments with their intended displacements. Their interaction in abstract computational space creates multi-thread inference process which we perceive as collective intelligence. Thus, a non-Turing model of computation is used. This theory allows simple formal definition of collective intelligence as the property of social structure and seems to be working well for a wide spectrum of beings, from bacterial colonies up to human social structures. Collective intelligence considered as a specific computational process is providing a straightforward explanation of several social phenomena. For this model of collective intelligence, the formal definition of IQS (IQ Social) was proposed and was defined as "the probability function over the time and domain of N-element inferences which are reflecting inference activity of the social structure". While IQS seems to be computationally hard, modeling of social structure in terms of a computational process as described above gives a chance for approximation. Prospective applications are optimization of companies through the maximization of their IQS, and the analysis of drug resistance against collective intelligence of bacterial colonies.
在这个模型中，生命和信息被模拟为带有数理逻辑表达式的抽象信息分子。由于它们与环境的相互作用以及预期的位移，它们是准随机位移。它们在抽象计算空间中的相互作用产生了我们称之为集体智能的多线程推理过程。因此，使用了一个非图灵计算模型。这个理论允许将集体智慧作为社会结构的属性进行简单的形式化定义，并且似乎在从细菌群落到人类社会结构的广泛范围内都很有效。集体智慧被认为是一种特定的计算过程，它为几种社会现象提供了直接的解释。对于这种集体智力模型，提出了 IQS (IQ Social)的正式定义，并将其定义为“反映社会结构推理活动的 n 元素推理在时间和领域上的概率密度函数”。尽管智商测试看起来很难计算，但是根据上面描述的计算过程对社会结构进行建模提供了一个近似的机会。前瞻性应用是通过最大化企业的智商，以及对细菌菌落集体智慧的耐药性分析，对企业进行优化。
=== Collective intelligence quotient ===
One measure sometimes applied, especially by more artificial intelligence focused theorists, is a "collective intelligence quotient"<ref name="auto">{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=_tHmKrpSeEQC&pg=PA141&lpg=PA141&dq=collective+intelligence+quotient#v=onepage|title=Computational Collective Intelligence. Semantic Web, Social Networks and Multiagent Systems: First International Conference, ICCCI 2009, Wroclaw, Poland, October 5–7, 2009, Proceedings|last=Kowalczyk|first=Ryszard|date=2009-09-23|publisher=Springer Science & Business Media|isbn=9783642044403}}</ref> (or "cooperation quotient") – which can be normalized from the "individual" [[intelligence quotient]] (IQ)<ref name="auto"/> – thus making it possible to determine the marginal intelligence added by each new individual participating in the [[collective action]], thus using [[Metric (mathematics)|metrics]] to avoid the hazards of [[group think]] and [[stupidity]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/collective-iq.html|title=About Collective IQ - Doug Engelbart Institute|last=Administrator|website=www.dougengelbart.org|access-date=2016-12-11}}</ref>
One measure sometimes applied, especially by more artificial intelligence focused theorists, is a "collective intelligence quotient" (or "cooperation quotient") – which can be normalized from the "individual" intelligence quotient (IQ)
有时候，特别是对于那些更关注人工智能的理论家来说，一个常用的衡量标准就是“集体智商”(或者“合作商数”) ，这个标准可以从“个人”智商(IQ)中归一化
== Applications ==
==== Elicitation of point estimates ====
Here, the goal is to get an estimate (in a single value) of something. For example, estimating the weight of an object, or the release date of a product or probability of success of a project etc. as seen in prediction markets like Intrade, HSX or InklingMarkets and also in several implementations of crowdsourced estimation of a numeric outcome. Essentially, we try to get the average value of the estimates provided by the members in the crowd.
Here, the goal is to get an estimate (in a single value) of something. For example, estimating the weight of an object, or the release date of a product or probability of success of a project etc. as seen in prediction markets like Intrade, HSX or InklingMarkets and also in several implementations of crowdsourced estimation of a numeric outcome. Essentially, we try to get the average value of the estimates provided by the members in the crowd.
在这里，目标是得到一个估计(在一个单一的价值)的东西。例如，估计一个对象的重量，或者一个产品的发布日期，或者一个项目的成功概率等等。在 Intrade、 HSX 或 InklingMarkets 等预测市场，以及数字结果的众包估计实现中都可以看到这一点。本质上，我们试图得到人群中成员提供的估计值的平均值。
==== Opinion aggregation ====
In this situation, opinions are gathered from the crowd regarding an idea, issue or product. For example, trying to get a rating (on some scale) of a product sold online (such as Amazon's star rating system). Here, the emphasis is to collect and simply aggregate the ratings provided by customers/users.
In this situation, opinions are gathered from the crowd regarding an idea, issue or product. For example, trying to get a rating (on some scale) of a product sold online (such as Amazon's star rating system). Here, the emphasis is to collect and simply aggregate the ratings provided by customers/users.
在这种情况下，从人群中收集关于一个想法、问题或产品的意见。例如，试图获得在线销售产品的评级(在一定规模上)(如亚马逊的星级评级系统)。这里的重点是收集并简单地汇总客户 / 用户提供的评级。
==== Idea Collection ====
In these problems, someone solicits ideas for projects, designs or solutions from the crowd. For example, ideas on solving a [[data science]] problem (as in [[Kaggle]]) or getting a good design for a T-shirt (as in [[Threadless]]) or in getting answers to simple problems that only humans can do well (as in Amazon's Mechanical Turk). The objective is to gather the ideas and devise some selection criteria to choose the best ideas.
In these problems, someone solicits ideas for projects, designs or solutions from the crowd. For example, ideas on solving a data science problem (as in Kaggle) or getting a good design for a T-shirt (as in Threadless) or in getting answers to simple problems that only humans can do well (as in Amazon's Mechanical Turk). The objective is to gather the ideas and devise some selection criteria to choose the best ideas.
在这些问题中，有人从人群中征求项目、设计或解决方案的想法。例如，解决数据科学问题的想法(比如在 Kaggle) ，为 t 恤设计好的想法(比如在 Threadless) ，或者为只有人类才能解决的简单问题找到答案的想法(比如在亚马逊的土耳其机器人上)。目的是收集想法，并设计一些选择标准，以选择最好的想法。
[[James Surowiecki]] divides the advantages of disorganized decision-making into three main categories, which are cognition, cooperation and coordination.<ref name="Surowiecki"/>{{full citation needed|date=November 2017}}
James Surowiecki divides the advantages of disorganized decision-making into three main categories, which are cognition, cooperation and coordination.
James Surowiecki 将无组织决策的优势分为三大类: 认知型、合作型和协调型。
=== Cognition ===
==== Market judgment ====
Because of the Internet's ability to rapidly convey large amounts of information throughout the world, the use of collective intelligence to predict stock prices and stock price direction has become increasingly viable.<ref name=":22">{{Cite book|last=Kaplan|first=Craig A.|year=2001|url=http://www.iqco.com/consulting/Kaplan_TESADI_Final.pdf|journal=Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Conference|volume=5|pages=2893–2898|via=|doi=10.1109/ICSMC.2001.971949|isbn=978-0-7803-7087-6|title=Collective intelligence: A new approach to stock price forecasting}}</ref> Websites aggregate stock market information that is as current as possible so professional or amateur stock analysts can publish their viewpoints, enabling amateur investors to submit their financial opinions and create an aggregate opinion.<ref name=":22" /> The opinion of all investor can be weighed equally so that a pivotal premise of the effective application of collective intelligence can be applied: the masses, including a broad spectrum of stock market expertise, can be utilized to more accurately predict the behavior of financial markets.<ref>{{cite book|doi=10.1007/978-3-642-15420-1|last1=Ma|first1=Ying|last2=Li|first2=Guanyi|last3=Dong|first3=Yingsai|last4=Qin|first4=Zengchang|title=Minority Game Data Mining for Stock Market Predictions|journal=Agents and Data Mining Interaction, 6th International Workshopon Agents and Data Mining Interaction, ADMI 2010|volume=5980|year=2010|url=http://icmll.buaa.edu.cn/publications/Conference%20Papers/LectureNotesCS/ADMI.pdf|series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science|isbn=978-3-642-15419-5|bibcode=2010LNCS.5980.....C|access-date=2 March 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121021040736/http://icmll.buaa.edu.cn/publications/Conference%20Papers/LectureNotesCS/ADMI.pdf|archive-date=21 October 2012|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|doi=10.1007/978-3-642-23935-9_24|last1=Yu|first1=Du|last2=Dong|first2=Yingsai|last3=Qin|first3=Zengchang|last4=Wan|first4=Tao|title=Exploring Market Behaviors with Evolutionary Mixed-Games Learning Model|journal=Computational Collective Intelligence. Technologies and Applications – Third International Conference, ICCCI 2011|volume=6922|year=2011|url=http://dsd.future-lab.cn/research/publications/2011/ICCCI-springer.pdf|pages=244–253|series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science|isbn=978-3-642-23934-2}}</ref>
Because of the Internet's ability to rapidly convey large amounts of information throughout the world, the use of collective intelligence to predict stock prices and stock price direction has become increasingly viable. Websites aggregate stock market information that is as current as possible so professional or amateur stock analysts can publish their viewpoints, enabling amateur investors to submit their financial opinions and create an aggregate opinion.
由于互联网能够在全世界迅速传递大量信息，利用集体智慧预测股票价格和股票价格走向已变得越来越可行。网站聚合尽可能最新的股票市场信息，这样专业或业余股票分析师可以发表他们的观点，使业余投资者提交他们的金融意见和创造一个聚合的意见。
Collective intelligence underpins the [[efficient-market hypothesis]] of [[Eugene Fama]]<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Fama | first1 = E.F. | year = 1970 | title = Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work | url = | journal = Journal of Finance | volume = 25 | issue = 2| pages = 383–417 | doi=10.2307/2325486| jstor = 2325486 }}</ref> – although the term collective intelligence is not used explicitly in his paper. Fama cites research conducted by [[Michael C. Jensen|Michael Jensen]]<ref name=":23">{{cite journal | last1 = Jensen | first1 = M.C | year = 1967 | title = The Performance of Mutual Funds in the Period 1945–1964 | journal = Journal of Finance | volume = 23 | issue = 2| pages = 389–416 | doi=10.1111/j.1540-6261.1968.tb00815.x| hdl = 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1968.tb00815.x | hdl-access = free }}</ref> in which 89 out of 115 selected funds underperformed relative to the index during the period from 1955 to 1964. But after removing the loading charge (up-front fee) only 72 underperformed while after removing brokerage costs only 58 underperformed. On the basis of such evidence [[index fund]]s became popular investment vehicles using the collective intelligence of the market, rather than the judgement of professional fund managers, as an investment strategy.<ref name=":23" />
Collective intelligence underpins the efficient-market hypothesis of Eugene Fama – although the term collective intelligence is not used explicitly in his paper. Fama cites research conducted by Michael Jensen in which 89 out of 115 selected funds underperformed relative to the index during the period from 1955 to 1964. But after removing the loading charge (up-front fee) only 72 underperformed while after removing brokerage costs only 58 underperformed. On the basis of such evidence index funds became popular investment vehicles using the collective intelligence of the market, rather than the judgement of professional fund managers, as an investment strategy.
集体智慧支撑着 Eugene Fama 的效率市场假说，尽管在他的论文中并没有明确使用集体智慧这个术语。法玛引用了迈克尔•詹森(Michael Jensen)进行的一项研究。在1955年至1964年期间，选定的115只基金中，有89只表现不及指数。但是在去除加载费(预付费)之后，只有72个股票表现不佳，而去除经纪成本之后，只有58个股票表现不佳。在这些证据的基础上，指数基金成为流行的投资工具，利用市场的集体智慧，而不是专业基金经理的判断，作为一种投资策略。
==== Predictions in politics and technology ====
[[File:U.S. states (and territories) by election methods, 2016.svg|thumb|Voting methods used in the United States 2016]]
Voting methods used in the United States 2016
美国2016年的投票方式
Political parties mobilize large numbers of people to form policy, select candidates and finance and run election campaigns.<ref name=":24">{{Cite web|url=http://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/11168/vote-amount-according-to-intelligence|title=Vote amount according to "intelligence"|website=politics.stackexchange.com|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref> Knowledge focusing through various [[voting]] methods allows perspectives to converge through the assumption that uninformed voting is to some degree random and can be filtered from the decision process leaving only a residue of informed consensus.<ref name=":24" /> Critics point out that often bad ideas, misunderstandings, and misconceptions are widely held, and that structuring of the decision process must favor experts who are presumably less prone to random or misinformed voting in a given context.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9907.html|title=Landemore, H.: Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many. (eBook and Paperback)|website=press.princeton.edu|access-date=2016-12-04}}</ref>
Political parties mobilize large numbers of people to form policy, select candidates and finance and run election campaigns. Knowledge focusing through various voting methods allows perspectives to converge through the assumption that uninformed voting is to some degree random and can be filtered from the decision process leaving only a residue of informed consensus.
各政党动员大量民众制定政策，选择候选人，资助和开展竞选活动。通过各种投票方法聚焦的知识可以通过假设无知投票在某种程度上是随机的，并且可以从决策过程中过滤掉，只留下知情共识的残留，从而使观点趋于一致。
Companies such as Affinnova (acquired by Nielsen), [[Google]], [[InnoCentive]], [[Marketocracy]], and [[Threadless]]<ref name=":17">{{Cite journal|last=Bonabeau|first=E|year=2009|title=The power of collective intelligence|journal=MIT Sloan Management Review|volume=50|pages=45–52|id={{ProQuest|224962498}}}}</ref> have successfully employed the concept of collective intelligence in bringing about the next generation of technological changes through their research and development (R&D), customer service, and knowledge management.<ref name=":17" /><ref>{{Cite report|last=Malone|first=Thomas W.|last2=Laubacher|first2=Robert|last3=Dellarocas|first3=Chrysanthos|date=2009-02-03|title=Harnessing Crowds: Mapping the Genome of Collective Intelligence|ssrn=1381502|location=Rochester, NY|publisher=Social Science Research Network|id=MIT Sloan Research Paper No. 4732-09}}</ref> An example of such application is Google's Project Aristotle in 2012, where the effect of collective intelligence on team makeup was examined in hundreds of the company's R&D teams.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/magazine/what-google-learned-from-its-quest-to-build-the-perfect-team.html|title=What Google Learned From Its Quest to Build the Perfect Team|last=Duhigg|first=Charles|date=2016-02-25|newspaper=The New York Times|access-date=2016-12-11}}</ref>
Companies such as Affinnova (acquired by Nielsen), Google, InnoCentive, Marketocracy, and Threadless have successfully employed the concept of collective intelligence in bringing about the next generation of technological changes through their research and development (R&D), customer service, and knowledge management. An example of such application is Google's Project Aristotle in 2012, where the effect of collective intelligence on team makeup was examined in hundreds of the company's R&D teams.
像 Affinnova (被尼尔森收购)、 Google、 InnoCentive、 Marketocracy 和 Threadless 这样的公司已经成功地运用了集体智慧的概念，通过他们的研发、客户服务和知识管理，带来了下一代的技术变革。这种应用的一个例子是2012年谷歌的亚里士多德项目，在该项目中，集体智慧对团队组成的影响在数百个公司的研发团队中得到了检验。
=== Cooperation ===
==== Networks of trust ====
[[File:Application of collective intelligence in Millennium Project.png|thumb|left|Application of collective intelligence in the Millennium Project]]
Application of collective intelligence in the Millennium Project
集体智慧在千年项目中的应用
In 2012, the ''Global Futures Collective Intelligence System'' (GFIS) was created by [[The Millennium Project]],<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.millennium-project.org/millennium/GFIS.html|title=Global Futures Intelligence System|website=www.millennium-project.org|access-date=2016-12-07}}</ref> which epitomizes collective intelligence as the synergistic intersection among data/information/knowledge, software/hardware, and expertise/insights that has a recursive learning process for better decision-making than the individual players alone.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.millennium-project.org/millennium/GFIS.html|title=Global Futures Intelligence System|website=www.millennium-project.org|access-date=2016-12-11}}</ref>
In 2012, the Global Futures Collective Intelligence System (GFIS) was created by The Millennium Project, which epitomizes collective intelligence as the synergistic intersection among data/information/knowledge, software/hardware, and expertise/insights that has a recursive learning process for better decision-making than the individual players alone.
2012年，千年项目创建了全球未来集体智慧系统(GFIS) ，该系统集中体现了集体智慧，即数据 / 信息 / 知识、软件 / 硬件以及专门知识 / 见解之间的协同交汇，具有一个循环学习过程，以比单个行为者更好地做出决策。
[[New media]] are often associated with the promotion and enhancement of collective intelligence. The ability of new media to easily store and retrieve information, predominantly through databases and the Internet, allows for it to be shared without difficulty. Thus, through interaction with new media, knowledge easily passes between sources {{Harv|Flew|2008}} resulting in a form of collective intelligence. The use of interactive new media, particularly the internet, promotes online interaction and this distribution of knowledge between users.
New media are often associated with the promotion and enhancement of collective intelligence. The ability of new media to easily store and retrieve information, predominantly through databases and the Internet, allows for it to be shared without difficulty. Thus, through interaction with new media, knowledge easily passes between sources resulting in a form of collective intelligence. The use of interactive new media, particularly the internet, promotes online interaction and this distribution of knowledge between users.
新媒体往往与促进和提高集体智慧联系在一起。新媒体能够方便地存储和检索信息，主要是通过数据库和互联网，使它能够毫无困难地被共享。因此，通过与新媒体的互动，知识很容易在资源之间传递，从而形成一种集体智慧。互动新媒体的使用，特别是互联网，促进了在线互动和用户之间的知识传播。
[[Francis Heylighen]], [[Valentin Turchin]], and Gottfried Mayer-Kress are among those who view collective intelligence through the lens of computer science and [[cybernetics]]. In their view, the Internet enables collective intelligence at the widest, planetary scale, thus facilitating the emergence of a [[global brain]].
Francis Heylighen, Valentin Turchin, and Gottfried Mayer-Kress are among those who view collective intelligence through the lens of computer science and cybernetics. In their view, the Internet enables collective intelligence at the widest, planetary scale, thus facilitating the emergence of a global brain.
弗朗西斯 · 海莱恩(Francis Heylighen)、瓦伦丁 · 图尔钦(Valentin Turchin)和戈特弗里德 · 梅耶-克雷斯(Gottfried Mayer-Kress)等人都是从计算机科学和控制论的角度来看待集体智慧的。在他们看来，互联网使集体智慧在最广泛的，全球规模，从而促进了全球大脑的出现。
The developer of the World Wide Web, [[Tim Berners-Lee]], aimed to promote sharing and publishing of information globally. Later his employer opened up the technology for free use. In the early '90s, the Internet's potential was still untapped, until the mid-1990s when 'critical mass', as termed by the head of the Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA), Dr. [[J.C.R. Licklider]], demanded more accessibility and utility.<ref name="Weiss, A. 2005 pp. 19-23">Weiss, A. (2005). The Power of Collective Intelligence. Collective Intelligence, pp. 19–23</ref> The driving force of this Internet-based collective intelligence is the digitization of information and communication. [[Henry Jenkins]], a key theorist of new media and media convergence draws on the theory that collective intelligence can be attributed to media convergence and participatory culture {{Harv|Flew|2008}}. He criticizes contemporary education for failing to incorporate online trends of collective problem solving into the classroom, stating "whereas a collective intelligence community encourages ownership of work as a group, schools grade individuals". Jenkins argues that interaction within a knowledge community builds vital skills for young people, and teamwork through collective intelligence communities contribute to the development of such skills.<ref name=":25">{{Cite web|url=http://labweb.education.wisc.edu/curric606/readings/Jenkins2002.pdf|title=INTERACTIVE AUDIENCES? THE 'COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE' OF MEDIA FANS|last=Henry|first=Jenkins|access-date=December 11, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180426232104/https://labweb.education.wisc.edu/curric606/readings/Jenkins2002.pdf|archive-date=26 April 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref> Collective intelligence is not merely a quantitative contribution of information from all cultures, it is also qualitative.<ref name=":25" />
The developer of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners-Lee, aimed to promote sharing and publishing of information globally. Later his employer opened up the technology for free use. In the early '90s, the Internet's potential was still untapped, until the mid-1990s when 'critical mass', as termed by the head of the Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA), Dr. J.C.R. Licklider, demanded more accessibility and utility. The driving force of this Internet-based collective intelligence is the digitization of information and communication. Henry Jenkins, a key theorist of new media and media convergence draws on the theory that collective intelligence can be attributed to media convergence and participatory culture . He criticizes contemporary education for failing to incorporate online trends of collective problem solving into the classroom, stating "whereas a collective intelligence community encourages ownership of work as a group, schools grade individuals". Jenkins argues that interaction within a knowledge community builds vital skills for young people, and teamwork through collective intelligence communities contribute to the development of such skills. Collective intelligence is not merely a quantitative contribution of information from all cultures, it is also qualitative.
万维网的开发者，蒂姆伯纳斯李，旨在促进全球信息的共享和发布。后来，他的雇主开放了这项技术供免费使用。在90年代早期，互联网的潜力还没有被开发出来，直到90年代中期，高级研究计划署(ARPA)负责人 j.c.r 博士称之为“临界质量”。Licklider 要求更多的可访问性和实用性。这种基于互联网的集体智慧的驱动力是信息和通信的数字化。新媒体和 media concentration 的核心理论家 Henry Jenkins 提出了集体智慧可以归因于 media concentration 和参与式文化的理论。他批评当代教育未能将集体解决问题的在线趋势纳入课堂，指出“而集体智慧社区鼓励作为一个团体、学校为个人工作的所有权”。詹金斯认为，知识社区内的互动为年轻人建立了重要的技能，通过集体智慧社区的团队合作有助于这些技能的发展。集体智慧不仅仅是来自所有文化的信息的定量贡献，它也是定性的。
[[Pierre Lévy|Lévy]] and [[Derrick de Kerckhove|de Kerckhove]] consider CI from a mass communications perspective, focusing on the ability of networked information and communication technologies to enhance the community knowledge pool. They suggest that these communications tools enable humans to interact and to share and collaborate with both ease and speed (Flew 2008). With the development of the [[Internet]] and its widespread use, the opportunity to contribute to knowledge-building communities, such as [[Wikipedia]], is greater than ever before. These computer networks give participating users the opportunity to store and to retrieve knowledge through the collective access to these databases and allow them to "harness the hive"<ref>{{Cite book|title=New Media: an introduction.|last=Flew|first=Terry|publisher=Oxford University Press.|year=2008|isbn=|location=Melbourne|pages=|quote=|via=}}</ref> Researchers at the [[MIT Center for Collective Intelligence]] research and explore collective intelligence of groups of people and computers.<ref>[http://cci.mit.edu/people/index.html MIT Center for Collective Intelligence] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100611041615/http://cci.mit.edu/people/index.html |date=11 June 2010 }}. Cci.mit.edu. Retrieved on 2013-07-13.</ref>
Lévy and de Kerckhove consider CI from a mass communications perspective, focusing on the ability of networked information and communication technologies to enhance the community knowledge pool. They suggest that these communications tools enable humans to interact and to share and collaborate with both ease and speed (Flew 2008). With the development of the Internet and its widespread use, the opportunity to contribute to knowledge-building communities, such as Wikipedia, is greater than ever before. These computer networks give participating users the opportunity to store and to retrieve knowledge through the collective access to these databases and allow them to "harness the hive" Researchers at the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence research and explore collective intelligence of groups of people and computers.
L vy 和 de Kerckhove 从大众传播的角度考虑 CI，关注网络信息和通信技术增强社区知识库的能力。他们认为这些通信工具使人类能够轻松快捷地互动、分享和协作(Flew 2008)。随着互联网的发展及其广泛应用，向维基百科等知识建设社区作出贡献的机会比以往任何时候都大。这些计算机网络使参与的用户有机会通过集体访问这些数据库来存储和检索知识，并使他们能够“利用蜂群”。麻省理工学院集体智慧中心(MIT Center for Collective Intelligence)的研究人员进行研究，探索集体智慧中的人和计算机。
In this context collective intelligence is often confused with [[shared knowledge]]. The former is the sum total of information held individually by members of a community while the latter is information that is believed to be true and known by all members of the community.<ref>Jenkins, H. 2006. ''[https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780814742815 Convergence Culture]''. New York: New York University Press.</ref> Collective intelligence as represented by [[Web 2.0]] has less user engagement than [[collaborative intelligence]]. An art project using Web 2.0 platforms is "Shared Galaxy", an experiment developed by an anonymous artist to create a collective identity that shows up as one person on several platforms like MySpace, Facebook, YouTube and Second Life. The password is written in the profiles and the accounts named "Shared Galaxy" are open to be used by anyone. In this way many take part in being one.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Scardamalia|first=Marlene|last2=Bereiter|first2=Carl|date=1994-07-01|title=Computer Support for Knowledge-Building Communities|journal=Journal of the Learning Sciences|volume=3|issue=3|pages=265–283|doi=10.1207/s15327809jls0303_3|citeseerx=10.1.1.600.463}}</ref> Another art project using collective intelligence to produce artistic work is Curatron, where a large group of artists together decides on a smaller group that they think would make a good collaborative group. The process is used based on an algorithm computing the collective preferences<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.vocativ.com/culture/art-culture/math-takes-guessing-art-curation/|title=Math Takes the Guessing Out of Artistic Collaboration|date=9 July 2014|publisher=}}</ref> In creating what he calls 'CI-Art', Nova Scotia based artist Mathew Aldred follows Pierry Lévy's definition of collective intelligence.<ref>Mathew Aldred, May 2016. {{cite web|title=What is Collective Intelligence Art?|year=2016|url=http://www.collectiveintelligenceart.ca/collective-intelligence-art.html|access-date=1 October 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161002024912/http://www.collectiveintelligenceart.ca/collective-intelligence-art.html|archive-date=2 October 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> Aldred's CI-Art event in March 2016 involved over four hundred people from the community of Oxford, Nova Scotia, and internationally.<ref>Amherst News Citizen Record, March 17, 2016. {{cite web|title=Community creation taking place in Oxford|year=2016|url=http://www.cumberlandnewsnow.com/News/Local/2016-03-17/article-4469315/Community-creation-taking-place-in-Oxford/1|access-date=1 October 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161006015018/http://www.cumberlandnewsnow.com/News/Local/2016-03-17/article-4469315/Community-creation-taking-place-in-Oxford/1|archive-date=6 October 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>Oxford Regional Education Centre{{cite web|title=Nexus OREC|year=2016|url=http://www.goldenbears.ca/nexus-orec.html|access-date=1 October 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161006014256/http://www.goldenbears.ca/nexus-orec.html|archive-date=6 October 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> Later work developed by Aldred used the UNU [[swarm intelligence]] system to create digital drawings and paintings.<ref>UNU Interview with artist, May 23, 2016. {{cite web|title=Artwork from an emergent hive mind|year=2016|url=http://unu.ai/ci-art/}}</ref> The Oxford Riverside Gallery (Nova Scotia) held a public CI-Art event in May 2016, which connected with online participants internationally.<ref>Oxford Riverside Gallery News, May 2016. {{cite web|title=CI-Art event at Oxford Riverside Gallery 'Nexus' opening|year=2016|url=http://www.oxfordriversidegallery.ca/news/ci-art-event-at-oxford-riverside-gallery-nexus-opening}}</ref>
In this context collective intelligence is often confused with shared knowledge. The former is the sum total of information held individually by members of a community while the latter is information that is believed to be true and known by all members of the community. Collective intelligence as represented by Web 2.0 has less user engagement than collaborative intelligence. An art project using Web 2.0 platforms is "Shared Galaxy", an experiment developed by an anonymous artist to create a collective identity that shows up as one person on several platforms like MySpace, Facebook, YouTube and Second Life. The password is written in the profiles and the accounts named "Shared Galaxy" are open to be used by anyone. In this way many take part in being one. Another art project using collective intelligence to produce artistic work is Curatron, where a large group of artists together decides on a smaller group that they think would make a good collaborative group. The process is used based on an algorithm computing the collective preferences In creating what he calls 'CI-Art', Nova Scotia based artist Mathew Aldred follows Pierry Lévy's definition of collective intelligence. Aldred's CI-Art event in March 2016 involved over four hundred people from the community of Oxford, Nova Scotia, and internationally. Later work developed by Aldred used the UNU swarm intelligence system to create digital drawings and paintings. The Oxford Riverside Gallery (Nova Scotia) held a public CI-Art event in May 2016, which connected with online participants internationally.
在这种情况下，集体智慧常常与共享知识相混淆。前者是社区成员个人掌握的信息的总和，而后者是社区所有成员都相信是真实的和知道的信息。以 Web 2.0为代表的集体智慧与协同智能相比，用户参与度更低。使用 Web 2.0平台的一个艺术项目是“共享银河”(Shared Galaxy) ，这是一位匿名艺术家开发的一个实验，目的是创建一个集体身份，在 MySpace、 Facebook、 YouTube 和“第二人生”(Second Life)等多个平台上以一个人的形。密码写在个人资料中，名为“ Shared Galaxy”的账户可供任何人使用。以这种方式，许多人参与成为一个。另一个利用集体智慧来创作艺术作品的艺术项目是 Curatron，在这个项目中，一大群艺术家一起决定组建一个较小的团队，他们认为这个团队可以成为一个很好的合作团队。这个过程是基于计算集体偏好的算法来进行的。在创造他所谓的“集体艺术”时，新斯科舍艺术家马修 · 奥尔德雷德遵循皮埃尔 · 维对集体智慧的定义。2016年3月，来自新斯科舍牛津大学和世界各地的400多人参加了奥尔德雷德的 CI-Art 活动。后来的工作由 Aldred 开发，他使用联合国大学的群体智能系统来创作数码素描和绘画。2016年5月，牛津河畔美术馆(新斯科舍)举办了一次公开的 CI-Art 活动，与国际在线参与者取得了联系。
[[File:Collaborative tagging.png|thumb|Parenting social network and collaborative tagging as pillars for automatic IPTV content blocking system]]
Parenting social network and collaborative tagging as pillars for automatic IPTV content blocking system
为人父母的社交网络和分众分类法电视作为 IPTV 内容自动屏蔽系统的支柱
In [[social bookmarking]] (also called collaborative tagging),<ref name=":26">{{Cite book|last=Millen|first=David R.|last2=Feinberg|first2=Jonathan|last3=Kerr|first3=Bernard|date=2006-01-01|title=Dogear: Social Bookmarking in the Enterprise|journal=Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems|series=CHI '06|location=New York, NY, USA|publisher=ACM|pages=111–120|doi=10.1145/1124772.1124792|isbn=978-1595933720}}</ref> users assign tags to resources shared with other users, which gives rise to a type of information organisation that emerges from this [[crowdsourcing]] process. The resulting information structure can be seen as reflecting the collective knowledge (or collective intelligence) of a community of users and is commonly called a "[[Folksonomy]]", and the process can be captured by [[models of collaborative tagging]].<ref name=":26" />
In social bookmarking (also called collaborative tagging), users assign tags to resources shared with other users, which gives rise to a type of information organisation that emerges from this crowdsourcing process. The resulting information structure can be seen as reflecting the collective knowledge (or collective intelligence) of a community of users and is commonly called a "Folksonomy", and the process can be captured by models of collaborative tagging.
在社会性书签中，用户将标签分配给与其他用户共享的资源，这就产生了一种从众包过程中涌现出来的信息组织分众分类法。由此产生的信息结构可以被视为反映了一个用户社区的集体知识(或集体智慧) ，通常被称为“大众分类法” ，这个过程可以被分众分类法的模型捕捉到。
Recent research using data from the social bookmarking website [[Delicious (website)|Delicious]], has shown that collaborative tagging systems exhibit a form of [[complex system]]s (or [[Self-organization|self-organizing]]) dynamics.<ref name="WWW07-ref" >Harry Halpin, Valentin Robu, Hana Shepherd [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1242572.1242602 The Complex Dynamics of Collaborative Tagging], Proceedings 6th International Conference on the World Wide Web (WWW'07), Banff, Canada, pp. 211–220, ACM Press, 2007.</ref><ref>{{cite book|doi=10.1145/1460563.1460600|last1=Fu|first1=Wai-Tat|title=Semantic imitation in social tagging|journal=ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction|pages=229|year=2010|isbn=9781605580074}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Fu|first1=Wai-Tat|title=A Semantic Imitation Model of Social Tagging.|journal=Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Social Computing|pages=66–72|date=August 2009|doi=10.1109/CSE.2009.382|isbn=978-1-4244-5334-4}}</ref> Although there is no central controlled vocabulary to constrain the actions of individual users, the distributions of tags that describe different resources has been shown to converge over time to a stable [[power law]] distributions.<ref name="WWW07-ref" /> Once such stable distributions form, examining the [[correlation]]s between different tags can be used to construct simple folksonomy graphs, which can be efficiently partitioned to obtained a form of community or shared vocabularies.<ref name="TWEB-ref" >Valentin Robu, Harry Halpin, Hana Shepherd [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1594173.1594176 Emergence of consensus and shared vocabularies in collaborative tagging systems], ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB), Vol. 3(4), article 14, ACM Press, September 2009.</ref> Such vocabularies can be seen as a form of collective intelligence, emerging from the decentralised actions of a community of users. The Wall-it Project is also an example of social bookmarking.<ref>Carlos J. Costa, January 2012. {{cite web|title=Article on Wall-it project|year=2012|url=http://masteropensource.wordpress.com/2012/01/21/wall-it/}}</ref>
Recent research using data from the social bookmarking website Delicious, has shown that collaborative tagging systems exhibit a form of complex systems (or self-organizing) dynamics. Although there is no central controlled vocabulary to constrain the actions of individual users, the distributions of tags that describe different resources has been shown to converge over time to a stable power law distributions. Such vocabularies can be seen as a form of collective intelligence, emerging from the decentralised actions of a community of users. The Wall-it Project is also an example of social bookmarking.
最近的研究使用来自社会性书签美味书签网站的数据，已经表明分众分类法系统展示了一种复杂系统(或自组织)动态的形式。虽然没有中央受控词表来约束单个用户的行为，但是描述不同资源的标签的分布已经被证明会随着时间的推移逐渐趋于稳定的幂律分布。这样的词汇可以被看作是一种集体智慧的形式，来自于用户群体的分散行为。墙-it 项目也是社会性书签的一个例子。
==== P2P business ====
Research performed by Tapscott and Williams has provided a few examples of the benefits of collective intelligence to business:<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Research performed by Tapscott and Williams has provided a few examples of the benefits of collective intelligence to business:
泰普斯科特和威廉姆斯的研究为集体智慧对商业的好处提供了几个例子:
;Talent utilization
Talent utilization
人才利用
:At the rate technology is changing, no firm can fully keep up in the innovations needed to compete. Instead, smart firms are drawing on the power of mass collaboration to involve participation of the people they could not employ. This also helps generate continual interest in the firm in the form of those drawn to new idea creation as well as investment opportunities.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
At the rate technology is changing, no firm can fully keep up in the innovations needed to compete. Instead, smart firms are drawing on the power of mass collaboration to involve participation of the people they could not employ. This also helps generate continual interest in the firm in the form of those drawn to new idea creation as well as investment opportunities.
按照技术变化的速度，没有一家公司能够完全跟上竞争所需的创新。相反，聪明的公司正在利用大规模合作的力量，让那些他们无法雇用的人参与进来。这也有助于产生持续的兴趣，在公司的形式，吸引到新的想法创造以及投资机会。
;Demand creation
Demand creation
需求创造
:Firms can create a new market for complementary goods by engaging in open source community. Firms also are able to expand into new fields that they previously would not have been able to without the addition of resources and collaboration from the community. This creates, as mentioned before, a new market for complementary goods for the products in said new fields.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Firms can create a new market for complementary goods by engaging in open source community. Firms also are able to expand into new fields that they previously would not have been able to without the addition of resources and collaboration from the community. This creates, as mentioned before, a new market for complementary goods for the products in said new fields.
公司可以通过参与开源社区为互补产品创造一个新的市场。企业也能够扩展到新的领域，如果没有社区的资源和合作，它们以前无法做到这一点。如前所述，这为上述新领域的产品创造了一个新的补充商品市场。
;Costs reduction
Costs reduction
降低成本
:Mass collaboration can help to reduce costs dramatically. Firms can release a specific software or product to be evaluated or debugged by online communities. The results will be more personal, robust and error-free products created in a short amount of time and costs. New ideas can also be generated and explored by collaboration of online communities creating opportunities for free R&D outside the confines of the company.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Mass collaboration can help to reduce costs dramatically. Firms can release a specific software or product to be evaluated or debugged by online communities. The results will be more personal, robust and error-free products created in a short amount of time and costs. New ideas can also be generated and explored by collaboration of online communities creating opportunities for free R&D outside the confines of the company.
大规模合作可以帮助大幅降低成本。公司可以发布一个特定的软件或产品，由在线社区进行评估或调试。结果将是更加个性化，健壮和无错误的产品创建在短时间内和成本。通过在线社区的合作，也可以产生和探索新的想法，为公司之外的免费研发创造机会。
==== Open source software ====
Cultural theorist and online community developer, John Banks considered the contribution of online fan communities in the creation of the [[Trainz]] product. He argued that its commercial success was fundamentally dependent upon "the formation and growth of an active and vibrant online fan community that would both actively promote the product and create content- extensions and additions to the game software".<ref name="jbanks">John A.L. Banks. ''Negotiating Participatory Culture in the New Media Environment: Auran and the Trainz Online Community – An (Im)possible Relation'', The University of Queensland. School of English, Media Studies and Art History. MelbourneDAC2003</ref>
Cultural theorist and online community developer, John Banks considered the contribution of online fan communities in the creation of the Trainz product. He argued that its commercial success was fundamentally dependent upon "the formation and growth of an active and vibrant online fan community that would both actively promote the product and create content- extensions and additions to the game software".
文化理论家和在线社区开发者约翰 · 班克斯考虑了在线粉丝社区对 Trainz 产品创造的贡献。他认为，其商业成功从根本上取决于“一个活跃而充满活力的在线粉丝社区的形成和发展，这个社区将积极推广该产品，并为游戏软件提供内容扩展和附加功能”。
The increase in user created content and interactivity gives rise to issues of control over the game itself and ownership of the player-created content. This gives rise to fundamental legal issues, highlighted by Lessig<ref>L, Lessig,(2006)Code Version 2.0 (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books.</ref> and Bray and Konsynski,<ref>Bray, DA & Konsynski, BR, 2007, ''Virtual Worlds, Virtual Economies, Virtual Institutions'', viewed 10 October 2008, p. 1-27 <http://ssrn.com/abstract=962501></ref> such as [[intellectual property]] and property ownership rights.
The increase in user created content and interactivity gives rise to issues of control over the game itself and ownership of the player-created content. This gives rise to fundamental legal issues, highlighted by Lessig and Bray and Konsynski, such as intellectual property and property ownership rights.
用户创建的内容和交互性的增加引起了对游戏本身的控制和玩家创建的内容的所有权问题。这就产生了一些基本的法律问题，Lessig、 Bray 和 Konsynski 强调了这些问题，如知识产权和财产所有权。
Gosney extends this issue of Collective Intelligence in videogames one step further in his discussion of [[alternate reality gaming]]. This genre, he describes as an "across-media game that deliberately blurs the line between the in-game and out-of-game experiences"<ref name=":27">Gosney, J.W, 2005, ''Beyond Reality: A Guide to Alternate Reality Gaming'', Thomson Course Technology, Boston.</ref> as events that happen outside the game reality "reach out" into the player's lives in order to bring them together. Solving the game requires "the collective and collaborative efforts of multiple players"; thus the issue of collective and collaborative team play is essential to ARG. Gosney argues that the Alternate Reality genre of gaming dictates an unprecedented level of collaboration and "collective intelligence" in order to solve the mystery of the game.<ref name=":27" />
Gosney extends this issue of Collective Intelligence in videogames one step further in his discussion of alternate reality gaming. This genre, he describes as an "across-media game that deliberately blurs the line between the in-game and out-of-game experiences" as events that happen outside the game reality "reach out" into the player's lives in order to bring them together. Solving the game requires "the collective and collaborative efforts of multiple players"; thus the issue of collective and collaborative team play is essential to ARG. Gosney argues that the Alternate Reality genre of gaming dictates an unprecedented level of collaboration and "collective intelligence" in order to solve the mystery of the game.
在讨论交替现实游戏时，戈斯尼将集体智慧这个问题在电子游戏中进一步扩展。他将这种游戏形容为“跨媒体游戏，故意模糊游戏内外体验之间的界限” ，因为游戏之外发生的事件会“触及”玩家的生活，从而将它们联系在一起。解决这个游戏需要“多个参与者的集体和协作努力” ，因此集体和协作的团队游戏问题对 ARG 来说是必不可少的。戈斯尼认为，虚拟现实游戏的类型决定了前所未有的合作水平和“集体智慧” ，以解决游戏的神秘性。
==== Benefits of co-operation ====
Co-operation helps to solve most important and most interesting multi-science problems. In his book, James Surowiecki mentioned that most scientists think that benefits of co-operation have much more value when compared to potential costs. Co-operation works also because at best it guarantees number of different viewpoints. Because of the possibilities of technology global co-operation is nowadays much easier and productive than before. It is clear that, when co-operation goes from university level to global it has significant benefits.
Co-operation helps to solve most important and most interesting multi-science problems. In his book, James Surowiecki mentioned that most scientists think that benefits of co-operation have much more value when compared to potential costs. Co-operation works also because at best it guarantees number of different viewpoints. Because of the possibilities of technology global co-operation is nowadays much easier and productive than before. It is clear that, when co-operation goes from university level to global it has significant benefits.
合作有助于解决最重要和最有趣的多学科问题。詹姆斯•索罗维茨基(James Surowiecki)在他的书中提到，大多数科学家认为，与潜在成本相比，合作的好处更有价值。合作之所以奏效，还因为它充其量只能保证不同观点的数量。由于技术的可能性，全球合作现在比以前更加容易和富有成效。显然，当合作从大学层面进入全球层面时，它会带来显著的好处。
For example, why do scientists co-operate? Science has become more and more isolated and each science field has spread even more and it is impossible for one person to be aware of all developments. This is true especially in experimental research where highly advanced equipment requires special skills. With co-operation scientists can use information from different fields and use it effectively instead of gathering all the information just by reading by themselves."<ref name="Surowiecki">Surowiecki, J., 2007 'The Wisdom of crowds. Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few'</ref>{{full citation needed|date=November 2017}}
For example, why do scientists co-operate? Science has become more and more isolated and each science field has spread even more and it is impossible for one person to be aware of all developments. This is true especially in experimental research where highly advanced equipment requires special skills. With co-operation scientists can use information from different fields and use it effectively instead of gathering all the information just by reading by themselves."
例如，为什么科学家要合作？科学已经变得越来越孤立，每一个科学领域已经蔓延得更多，一个人不可能意识到所有的发展。这是真的，特别是在实验研究中，高度先进的设备需要特殊的技能。通过合作，科学家们可以利用不同领域的信息，并有效地加以利用，而不是仅仅通过自己阅读来收集所有的信息。”
=== Coordination ===
==== Ad-hoc communities ====
Military, trade unions, and corporations satisfy some definitions of CI – the most rigorous definition would require a capacity to respond to very arbitrary conditions without orders or guidance from "law" or "customers" to constrain actions. Online advertising companies are using collective intelligence to bypass traditional marketing and creative agencies.<ref>Lee, Sang M., et al. "Success factors of platform leadership in web 2.0 service business." Service Business 4.2 (2010): 89–103.</ref>
Military, trade unions, and corporations satisfy some definitions of CI – the most rigorous definition would require a capacity to respond to very arbitrary conditions without orders or guidance from "law" or "customers" to constrain actions. Online advertising companies are using collective intelligence to bypass traditional marketing and creative agencies.
军事、工会和公司满足 CI 的某些定义——最严格的定义要求有能力对非常武断的条件作出反应，而不需要”法律”或”客户”的命令或指导来约束行动。在线广告公司正在利用集体智慧来绕过传统的营销和创意机构。
The [https://web.archive.org/web/20151103044224/http://unu.ai/ UNU] open platform for "human swarming" (or "social swarming") establishes real-time closed-loop systems around groups of networked users molded after biological swarms, enabling human participants to behave as a unified collective intelligence.<ref name="Human Swarms">{{cite web|url=http://news.discovery.com/human/life/swarms-of-humans-power-a-i-platform-150603.htm|title=Swarms of Humans Power A.I. Platform|last=DNews|date=3 June 2015|publisher=}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|url=https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/ecal2015/ch117.html|first1=Louis B.|title=07/20/2015-07/24/2015|last1=Rosenberg|first2=Unanimous|last2=A.I.|first3=San|last3=Francisco|last4=California|last5=USA|date=1 January 2016|volume=13|pages=658–659|doi=10.7551/978-0-262-33027-5-ch117|isbn=9780262330275|access-date=12 October 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151027132802/https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/ecal2015/ch117.html|archive-date=27 October 2015|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref> When connected to UNU, groups of distributed users collectively answer questions and make predictions in real-time.<ref>Rosenberg, L.B., "Human swarming, a real-time method for parallel distributed intelligence," in Swarm/Human Blended Intelligence Workshop (SHBI), 2015, vol., no., pp.1–7, 28–29 Sept. 2015 doi: [https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SHBI.2015.7321685 10.1109/SHBI.2015.7321685]</ref> Early testing shows that human swarms can out-predict individuals.<ref name="Human Swarms"/> In 2016, an UNU swarm was challenged by a reporter to predict the winners of the Kentucky Derby, and successfully picked the first four horses, in order, beating 540 to 1 odds.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newsweek.com/artificial-intelligence-turns-20-11000-kentucky-derby-bet-457783|title=Artificial intelligence turns $20 into $11,000 in Kentucky Derby bet|date=10 May 2016|publisher=}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/06/02/what-happened-when-an-ai-hive-mind-answered-reddits-burning-politics-questions/|title=What happened when an A.I. hive mind answered Reddit's burning politics questions|first=Abby|last=Ohlheiser|date=2 June 2016|publisher=|via=washingtonpost.com}}</ref>
The [https://web.archive.org/web/20151103044224/http://unu.ai/ UNU] open platform for "human swarming" (or "social swarming") establishes real-time closed-loop systems around groups of networked users molded after biological swarms, enabling human participants to behave as a unified collective intelligence. When connected to UNU, groups of distributed users collectively answer questions and make predictions in real-time. Early testing shows that human swarms can out-predict individuals.
这个[ https://web.archive.org/web/20151103044224/http://UNU.ai/ 联合国大学]的开放平台为“人类群集”(或“社会群集”)建立了一个实时的闭环系统，围绕着被塑造成生物群集的网络用户群，使人类参与者能够表现为一个统一的集体智慧。当连接到联合国大学时，分布式用户组集体回答问题并实时作出预测。早期的测试表明，人类群体能够预测个体。
Specialized information sites such as Digital Photography Review<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dpreview.com/|title=Digital Photography Review|website=www.dpreview.com|access-date=2016-12-07}}</ref> or Camera Labs<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.cameralabs.com/|title=Camera reviews, DSLR reviews, lens reviews, photography guides {{!}} Cameralabs|website=www.cameralabs.com|access-date=2016-12-07}}</ref> is an example of collective intelligence. Anyone who has an access to the internet can contribute to distributing their knowledge over the world through the specialized information sites.
Specialized information sites such as Digital Photography Review or Camera Labs is an example of collective intelligence. Anyone who has an access to the internet can contribute to distributing their knowledge over the world through the specialized information sites.
专门的信息网站如数码摄影评论或相机实验室就是集体智慧的一个例子。任何能够上网的人都可以通过专门的信息网站在全世界传播他们的知识。
In [[learner-generated context]] a group of users marshal resources to create an ecology that meets their needs often (but not only) in relation to the co-configuration, co-creation and co-design of a particular learning space that allows learners to create their own context.<ref>Luckin, R., du Boulay, B., Smith, H., Underwood, J., Fitzpatrick, G., Holmberg, J., Kerawalla, L., Tunley, H., Brewster, D. and Pearce, D. (2005), '[http://srodev.sussex.ac.uk/403/1/jime.pdf Using Mobile Technology to Create Flexible Learning Contexts] '. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 22.</ref><ref>Luckin, R. (2006), Understanding Learning Contexts as Ecologies of Resources: From the Zone of Proximal Development to Learner Generated Contexts. Paper presented at the Proceedings of World Conference on Elearning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2006.</ref><ref>Luckin, R., Shurville, S. and Browne, T. (2007), '[https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10036/13334/blankfile.xxxx?sequence=1 Initiating e-learning by stealth, participation and consultation in a late majority institution]'. {{open access}} ''Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change'', '''3''' (3), 317–332. {{doi|10.1386/jots.3.3.317_1}}</ref> Learner-generated contexts represent an ''ad hoc'' community that facilitates coordination of collective action in a network of trust. An example of learner-generated context is found on the Internet when collaborative users pool knowledge in a "[[shared intelligence]] space". As the Internet has developed so has the concept of CI as a shared public forum. The global accessibility and availability of the Internet has allowed more people than ever to contribute and access ideas. (Flew 2008)
In learner-generated context a group of users marshal resources to create an ecology that meets their needs often (but not only) in relation to the co-configuration, co-creation and co-design of a particular learning space that allows learners to create their own context. Learner-generated contexts represent an ad hoc community that facilitates coordination of collective action in a network of trust. An example of learner-generated context is found on the Internet when collaborative users pool knowledge in a "shared intelligence space". As the Internet has developed so has the concept of CI as a shared public forum. The global accessibility and availability of the Internet has allowed more people than ever to contribute and access ideas. (Flew 2008)
在学习者生成的环境中，一组用户调动资源来创建一个生态系统，这个生态系统经常(但不仅仅是)满足学习者的需求，通过对特定学习空间的共同配置、共同创造和共同设计，使学习者能够创建自己的环境。学习者产生的环境代表了一个特殊的社区，促进了信任网络中集体行动的协调。在互联网上发现了一个学习者生成上下文的例子，即协作用户在一个”共享的情报空间”中汇集知识。随着互联网的发展，CI 作为一个共享的公共论坛的概念也随之产生。互联网的全球可及性和可用性使得比以往任何时候都更多的人能够贡献和获得想法。(《飞越2008》)
Games such as ''[[The Sims]]'' Series, and ''[[Second Life]]'' are designed to be non-linear and to depend on collective intelligence for expansion. This way of sharing is gradually evolving and influencing the mindset of the current and future generations.<ref name="Weiss, A. 2005 pp. 19-23"/> For them, collective intelligence has become a norm. In Terry Flew's discussion of '[[interactivity]]' in the online games environment, the ongoing interactive dialogue between users and game developers,<ref>Flew, Terry and Humphreys, Sal (2005) "Games: Technology, Industry, Culture" in Terry Flew, New Media: An Introduction (2nd edn), Oxford University Press, South Melbourne 101–114.</ref> he refers to Pierre Lévy's concept of Collective Intelligence {{Harv|Lévy|1998}} and argues this is active in videogames as clans or guilds in [[MMORPG]] constantly work to achieve goals. [[Henry Jenkins]] proposes that the participatory cultures emerging between games producers, media companies, and the end-users mark a fundamental shift in the nature of media production and consumption. Jenkins argues that this new participatory culture arises at the intersection of three broad new media trends.<ref>Henry Jenkins (2002) in Flew, Terry and Humphreys, Sal (2005) ''Games: Technology, Industry, Culture'' in Terry Flew, New Media: An Introduction (2nd edn), Oxford University Press, South Melbourne 101–114.</ref> Firstly, the development of new media tools/technologies enabling the creation of content. Secondly, the rise of subcultures promoting such creations, and lastly, the growth of value adding media conglomerates, which foster image, idea and narrative flow.
Games such as The Sims Series, and Second Life are designed to be non-linear and to depend on collective intelligence for expansion. This way of sharing is gradually evolving and influencing the mindset of the current and future generations. he refers to Pierre Lévy's concept of Collective Intelligence and argues this is active in videogames as clans or guilds in MMORPG constantly work to achieve goals. Henry Jenkins proposes that the participatory cultures emerging between games producers, media companies, and the end-users mark a fundamental shift in the nature of media production and consumption. Jenkins argues that this new participatory culture arises at the intersection of three broad new media trends. Firstly, the development of new media tools/technologies enabling the creation of content. Secondly, the rise of subcultures promoting such creations, and lastly, the growth of value adding media conglomerates, which foster image, idea and narrative flow.
像模拟人生系列和第二人生这样的游戏被设计成非线性的，依靠集体智慧来扩展。这种分享方式正在逐渐演变，并影响着今世后代的心态。他引用了皮埃尔 · l · 维的集体智慧的概念，并认为这一概念在电子游戏中非常活跃，因为 MMORPG 中的部落或行会不断努力以实现目标。亨利 · 詹金斯提出，游戏制作者、媒体公司和最终用户之间出现的参与性文化标志着媒体生产和消费性质的根本性转变。詹金斯认为，这种新的参与式文化产生于三大新媒体趋势的交汇点。首先，开发新的媒体工具 / 技术，使创作内容成为可能。其次，亚文化的兴起促进了这种创造，最后，传媒集团的价值增长，促进了形象、观念和叙事流程的形成。
==== Coordinating collective actions ====
[[File:Improvisational_actors.jpg|thumb|The cast of After School Improv learns an important lesson about improvisation and life]]
The cast of After School Improv learns an important lesson about improvisation and life
课后即兴表演的演员们学到了一堂关于即兴表演和生活的重要课程
Improvisational actors also experience a type of collective intelligence which they term "group mind", as theatrical improvisation relies on mutual cooperation and agreement,<ref name=":18">{{Cite journal|last=Vera|first=Dusya|last2=Crossan|first2=Mary|date=2004-06-01|title=Theatrical Improvisation: Lessons for Organizations|journal=Organization Studies|volume=25|issue=5|pages=727–749|doi=10.1177/0170840604042412}}</ref> leading to the unity of "group mind".<ref name=":18" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last=*|first=R. Keith Sawyer|date=2004-06-01|title=Improvised lessons: collaborative discussion in the constructivist classroom|journal=Teaching Education|volume=15|issue=2|pages=189–201|doi=10.1080/1047621042000213610}}</ref>
Improvisational actors also experience a type of collective intelligence which they term "group mind", as theatrical improvisation relies on mutual cooperation and agreement, leading to the unity of "group mind".
即兴表演者还体验到一种他们称之为”群体心智”的集体智慧，因为戏剧性的即兴表演依赖于相互合作和协议，从而导致”群体心智”的统一。
Growth of the Internet and mobile telecom has also produced "swarming" or "rendezvous" events that enable meetings or even dates on demand.<ref name="Wolpert arXiv:cs/9905004"/> The full impact has yet to be felt but the [[anti-globalization movement]], for example, relies heavily on e-mail, cell phones, pagers, SMS and other means of organizing.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=vskz1poDuvoC&pg=PR7&dq=anti+globalization+collective+intelligence#v=onepage|title=Globalization / Anti-Globalization: Beyond the Great Divide|last=Held|first=David|last2=McGrew|first2=Anthony|date=2007-11-19|publisher=Polity|isbn=9780745639116}}</ref> The [[Indymedia]] organization does this in a more journalistic way.<ref name=":19">{{Cite web|url=http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2001/09/11129.html|title='Anti-Globals' Use Internet As Collective Intelligence – UK Indymedia|website=www.indymedia.org.uk|access-date=2016-12-11}}</ref> Such resources could combine into a form of collective intelligence accountable only to the current participants yet with some strong moral or linguistic guidance from generations of contributors – or even take on a more obviously democratic form to advance shared goal.<ref name=":19" />
Growth of the Internet and mobile telecom has also produced "swarming" or "rendezvous" events that enable meetings or even dates on demand. The Indymedia organization does this in a more journalistic way. Such resources could combine into a form of collective intelligence accountable only to the current participants yet with some strong moral or linguistic guidance from generations of contributors – or even take on a more obviously democratic form to advance shared goal.
互联网和移动电信的发展也产生了”蜂拥”或”汇合”活动，使会议甚至日期按需而定。印第媒体以一种更新闻化的方式做到了这一点。这种资源可以结合成一种只对当前参与者负责的集体智慧形式，再加上几代捐助者提供的一些强有力的道德或语言指导，甚至可以采取一种更明显的民主形式来推进共同目标。
A further application of collective intelligence is found in the "Community Engineering for Innovations".<ref name="Idea Competitions">Jan Marco Leimeister, Michael Huber, Ulrich Bretschneider, Helmut Krcmar (2009): Leveraging Crowdsourcing: Activation-Supporting Components for IT-Based Ideas Competition. In: Journal of Management Information Systems (2009), Volume: 26, Issue: 1, Publisher: M.E. Sharpe Inc., Pages: 197–224, {{ISSN|0742-1222}}, {{doi|10.2753/MIS0742-1222260108}} [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1653890], Winfried Ebner; Jan Marco Leimeister; Helmut Krcmar (2009): Community Engineering for Innovations – The Ideas Competition as a method to nurture a Virtual Community for Innovations. In: R&D Management, 39 (4), pp 342–356 {{doi|10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00564.x}} [https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/219672/1/JML_145.pdf]</ref> In such an integrated framework proposed by Ebner et al., idea competitions and virtual communities are combined to better realize the potential of the collective intelligence of the participants, particularly in open-source R&D.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Ebner|first=Winfried|last2=Leimeister|first2=Jan Marco|last3=Krcmar|first3=Helmut|date=2009-09-01|title=Community engineering for innovations: the ideas competition as a method to nurture a virtual community for innovations|journal=R&D Management|volume=39|issue=4|pages=342–356|doi=10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00564.x|url=https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/219699/1/JML_173.pdf}}</ref> In management theory the use of collective intelligence and crowd sourcing leads to innovations and very robust answers to quantitative issues.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Fladerer |first1=Johannes-Paul |last2=Kurzmann |first2=Ernst |title=WISDOM OF THE MANY : how to create self -organisation and how to use collective... intelligence in companies and in society from mana. |date=November 2019 |publisher=BOOKS ON DEMAND |isbn=9783750422421 |url=https://www.bod.de/buchshop/the-wisdom-of-the-many-johannes-paul-fladerer-9783750422421 |language=de}}</ref> Therefore, collective intelligence and crowd sourcing is not necessaryly leading to the best solution to economic problems, but to a stable, good solution.
A further application of collective intelligence is found in the "Community Engineering for Innovations". In such an integrated framework proposed by Ebner et al., idea competitions and virtual communities are combined to better realize the potential of the collective intelligence of the participants, particularly in open-source R&D. In management theory the use of collective intelligence and crowd sourcing leads to innovations and very robust answers to quantitative issues. Therefore, collective intelligence and crowd sourcing is not necessaryly leading to the best solution to economic problems, but to a stable, good solution.
集体智慧的进一步应用可以在“创新社区工程”中找到。在 Ebner 等人提出的这样一个集成框架中，创意竞赛和虚拟社区被结合起来，以更好地实现参与者集体智慧的潜力，特别是在开源研发领域。在管理理论中，集体智慧和群体外包的使用导致了创新和对量化问题非常有力的答案。因此，集体智慧和群体外包并不是解决经济问题的最佳方案，而是一个稳定、良好的解决方案。
==== Coordination in different types of tasks ====
Collective actions or tasks require different amounts of coordination depending on the complexity of the task. Tasks vary from being highly independent simple tasks that require very little coordination to complex interdependent tasks that are built by many individuals and require a lot of coordination. In the article written by Kittur, Lee and Kraut the writers introduce a problem in cooperation: "When tasks require high coordination because the work is highly interdependent, having more contributors can increase process losses, reducing the effectiveness of the group below what individual members could optimally accomplish". Having a team too large the overall effectiveness may suffer even when the extra contributors increase the resources. In the end the overall costs from coordination might overwhelm other costs.<ref>Kittur, A., Lee, B. and Kraut, R. E. (2009) '[https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1518928 Coordination in collective intelligence: The role of team structure and task interdependence]', Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings, pp. 1495–1504.</ref>
Collective actions or tasks require different amounts of coordination depending on the complexity of the task. Tasks vary from being highly independent simple tasks that require very little coordination to complex interdependent tasks that are built by many individuals and require a lot of coordination. In the article written by Kittur, Lee and Kraut the writers introduce a problem in cooperation: "When tasks require high coordination because the work is highly interdependent, having more contributors can increase process losses, reducing the effectiveness of the group below what individual members could optimally accomplish". Having a team too large the overall effectiveness may suffer even when the extra contributors increase the resources. In the end the overall costs from coordination might overwhelm other costs.
集体行动或任务需要不同程度的协调，这取决于任务的复杂程度。任务可以是高度独立的简单任务，需要很少的协调，也可以是复杂的相互依赖的任务，这些任务是由许多个人构建的，需要大量的协调。在 Kittur、 Lee 和 Kraut 撰写的文章中，作者介绍了合作中的一个问题: ”当任务需要高度协调，因为工作是高度相互依赖的，有更多的贡献者可能会增加过程损失，降低团队的有效性，低于个别成员可以最佳完成的水平”。即使额外的捐助者增加了资源，如果团队过于庞大，整体效率可能会受到影响。最后，协调的总成本可能超过其他成本。
Group collective intelligence is a property that emerges through coordination from both bottom-up and top-down processes. In a bottom-up process the different characteristics of each member are involved in contributing and enhancing coordination. Top-down processes are more strict and fixed with norms, group structures and routines that in their own way enhance the group's collective work.<ref>[18] Woolley, A. W., Aggarwal, I. and Malone, T. W. (2015) 'Collective Intelligence and Group Performance', Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(6), pp. 420–424.</ref>
Group collective intelligence is a property that emerges through coordination from both bottom-up and top-down processes. In a bottom-up process the different characteristics of each member are involved in contributing and enhancing coordination. Top-down processes are more strict and fixed with norms, group structures and routines that in their own way enhance the group's collective work.
群体集体智慧是通过自下而上和自上而下过程的协调而产生的一种属性。在自下而上的过程中，每个成员的不同特点都参与促进和加强协调。自上而下的程序更加严格，有规范、小组结构和惯例，以自己的方式加强小组的集体工作。
== Alternative views ==
===A tool for combating self-preservation===
Tom Atlee reflects that, although humans have an innate ability to gather and analyze data, they are affected by culture, education and social institutions.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=YV4dCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA140|title=In Search of The Black Seed|last=Abdul-Karim|first=Kashif|date=2015-11-23|publisher=Lulu.com|isbn=9781329694897|page=140}}{{self-published source|date=February 2020}}</ref>{{self-published inline|date=February 2020}} A single person tends to make decisions motivated by self-preservation. Therefore, without collective intelligence, humans may drive themselves into extinction based on their selfish needs.<ref name=":21">Atlee, T. (2008). [http://www.communicationagents.com/tom_atlee/2008/05/15/reflections_on_the_evolution_of_choice_and_collective_intelligence.htm Reflections on the evolution of choice and collective intelligence] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080522033150/http://www.communicationagents.com/tom_atlee/2008/05/15/reflections_on_the_evolution_of_choice_and_collective_intelligence.htm |date=22 May 2008 }}, Retrieved 26 August 2008</ref>
Tom Atlee reflects that, although humans have an innate ability to gather and analyze data, they are affected by culture, education and social institutions. A single person tends to make decisions motivated by self-preservation. Therefore, without collective intelligence, humans may drive themselves into extinction based on their selfish needs.
汤姆 · 阿特利认为，虽然人类天生就有收集和分析数据的能力，但是他们受到文化、教育和社会制度的影响。一个人倾向于做出由自我保存驱动的决定。因此，如果没有集体智慧，人类可能会因为自私的需求而将自己逼入绝境。
===Separation from IQism===
Phillip Brown and Hugh Lauder quotes Bowles and [[Herbert Gintis|Gintis]] (1976) that in order to truly define collective intelligence, it is crucial to separate 'intelligence' from IQism.<ref name=":28">{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/education/2001/jun/18/socialsciences.highereducation1|title=Capitalism and Social Progress by Phillip Brown and Hugh Lauder (cont... )|date=2001-06-18|newspaper=The Guardian|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref> They go on to argue that intelligence is an achievement and can only be developed if allowed to.<ref name=":28" /> For example, earlier on, groups from the lower levels of society are severely restricted from aggregating and pooling their intelligence. This is because the elites fear that the collective intelligence would convince the people to rebel. If there is no such capacity and relations, there would be no infrastructure on which collective intelligence is built {{Harv|Brown|Lauder|2000|p=230}}. This reflects how powerful collective intelligence can be if left to develop.<ref name=":28" />
Phillip Brown and Hugh Lauder quotes Bowles and Gintis (1976) that in order to truly define collective intelligence, it is crucial to separate 'intelligence' from IQism. They go on to argue that intelligence is an achievement and can only be developed if allowed to. For example, earlier on, groups from the lower levels of society are severely restricted from aggregating and pooling their intelligence. This is because the elites fear that the collective intelligence would convince the people to rebel. If there is no such capacity and relations, there would be no infrastructure on which collective intelligence is built . This reflects how powerful collective intelligence can be if left to develop.
菲利普•布朗(Phillip Brown)和休•兰黛(Hugh Lauder)引用鲍尔斯(Bowles)和金蒂斯(Gintis)(1976)的话称，为了真正定义集体智慧，将“智慧”与智商分离至关重要。他们继续争辩说，智力是一种成就，只有在被允许的情况下才能得到发展。例如，早些时候，来自社会底层的群体在聚集和汇集他们的智力方面受到严格限制。这是因为精英阶层担心集体情报会说服人民造反。如果没有这种能力和关系，就不会有建立集体智慧的基础设施。这反映了如果任其发展，集体智慧是多么强大。
===Artificial intelligence views===
Skeptics, especially those critical of artificial intelligence and more inclined to believe that risk of [[bodily harm]] and bodily action are the basis of all unity between people, are more likely to emphasize the capacity of a group to take action and withstand harm as one fluid [[mass mobilization]], shrugging off harms the way a body shrugs off the loss of a few cells.<ref name=":29">{{Cite web|url=http://www.johnzerzan.net/radio/|title=John Zerzan: anti-civilization theorist, writer and speaker|website=www.johnzerzan.net|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref><ref name=":31">{{Cite journal|last=Moore|first=Jason W.|date=2001-01-01|editor-last=Arrighi|editor-first=Giovanni|editor2-last=Silver|editor2-first=Beverly J.|title=Globalization in Historical Perspective|journal=Science & Society|volume=65|issue=3|pages=386–397|doi=10.1521/siso.65.3.386.17767|jstor=40403938}}</ref> This strain of thought is most obvious in the [[anti-globalization movement]] and characterized by the works of [[John Zerzan]], [[Carol Moore]], and [[Starhawk]], who typically shun academics.<ref name=":29" /><ref name=":31"/> These theorists are more likely to refer to ecological and [[collective wisdom]] and to the role of [[consensus process]] in making ontological distinctions than to any form of "intelligence" as such, which they often argue does not exist, or is mere "cleverness".<ref name=":29" /><ref name=":31"/>
Skeptics, especially those critical of artificial intelligence and more inclined to believe that risk of bodily harm and bodily action are the basis of all unity between people, are more likely to emphasize the capacity of a group to take action and withstand harm as one fluid mass mobilization, shrugging off harms the way a body shrugs off the loss of a few cells. This strain of thought is most obvious in the anti-globalization movement and characterized by the works of John Zerzan, Carol Moore, and Starhawk, who typically shun academics. These theorists are more likely to refer to ecological and collective wisdom and to the role of consensus process in making ontological distinctions than to any form of "intelligence" as such, which they often argue does not exist, or is mere "cleverness".
怀疑论者，尤其是那些批评人工智能的人，更倾向于相信身体伤害和身体行为的风险是人与人之间所有团结的基础，更可能强调一个群体采取行动和承受伤害的能力，就像一个体液政治动员一样，无视身体对少数细胞损失的危害。这种思想倾向在《反全球化运动和《拥有属性约翰 · 泽尔赞、卡罗尔 · 摩尔和星鹰的著作中表现得最为明显，他们通常回避学者。这些理论家更可能提到生态和集体智慧以及协商一致进程在作出本体论区分方面的作用，而不是任何形式的”智慧”本身，因为他们常常认为这种智慧并不存在，或者仅仅是”聪明”。
Harsh critics of artificial intelligence on ethical grounds are likely to promote collective wisdom-building methods, such as the [[new tribalists]] and the [[Gaianism|Gaians]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://metamorphoptics.blogspot.com/|title=m e t a m o r p h o p t i c s|website=metamorphoptics.blogspot.com|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref> Whether these can be said to be collective intelligence systems is an open question. Some, e.g. [[Bill Joy]], simply wish to avoid any form of autonomous artificial intelligence and seem willing to work on rigorous collective intelligence in order to remove any possible niche for AI.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/|title=Why the Future Doesn't Need Us|last=Joy|first=Bill|newspaper=WIRED|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref>
Harsh critics of artificial intelligence on ethical grounds are likely to promote collective wisdom-building methods, such as the new tribalists and the Gaians. Whether these can be said to be collective intelligence systems is an open question. Some, e.g. Bill Joy, simply wish to avoid any form of autonomous artificial intelligence and seem willing to work on rigorous collective intelligence in order to remove any possible niche for AI.
基于道德理由对人工智能的严厉批评可能会促进集体智慧建设方法的发展，比如新部落主义者和盖亚人。这些是否可以说是集体智慧系统还是一个悬而未决的问题。有些，例如。比尔 · 乔伊只是希望避免任何形式的自主人工智能，并且似乎愿意致力于严格的集体智能，以便为人工智能去除任何可能的利基。
In contrast to these views, Artificial Intelligence companies such as [[Amazon Mechanical Turk]] and [[CrowdFlower]] are using collective intelligence and [[crowdsourcing]] or [[consensus-based assessment]] to collect the enormous amounts of data for [[machine learning]] algorithms such as [[Keras]] and [[IBM Watson]].
In contrast to these views, Artificial Intelligence companies such as Amazon Mechanical Turk and CrowdFlower are using collective intelligence and crowdsourcing or consensus-based assessment to collect the enormous amounts of data for machine learning algorithms such as Keras and IBM Watson.
与这些观点相反，亚马逊土耳其机器人(Amazon Mechanical Turk)和 CrowdFlower 等人工智能公司正在利用集体智能和众包或基于共识的评估，为 Keras 和 IBM 沃森等机器学习算法收集大量数据。
=== Solving climate change ===
Global collective intelligence is seen as the key in solving the challenges humankind faces now and in the future. [[Climate change]] is an example of a global issue which collective intelligence is currently trying to tackle. With the help of collective intelligence applications such as online [[crowdsourcing]], people across the globe are collaborating in developing solutions to climate change.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/earth/crowdsourcing-climate-change-solutions/|title=How Millions of People Can Help Solve Climate Change — NOVA Next {{!}} PBS|date=2014-01-15|work=NOVA Next|access-date=2017-10-31}}</ref>
Global collective intelligence is seen as the key in solving the challenges humankind faces now and in the future. Climate change is an example of a global issue which collective intelligence is currently trying to tackle. With the help of collective intelligence applications such as online crowdsourcing, people across the globe are collaborating in developing solutions to climate change.
全球集体智慧被视为解决人类现在和未来面临的挑战的关键。气候变化是集体智慧目前正在努力解决的全球问题的一个例子。在诸如在线众包等集体智慧应用的帮助下，全球各地的人们正在合作开发应对气候变化的解决方案。
== See also ==
{{Div col|colwidth=25em}}
=== Similar concepts and applications ===
* [[Citizen science]]
* [[Civic intelligence]]
* [[Collaborative filtering]]
* [[Collaborative innovation network]]
* [[Collective decision-making]]
* [[Collective effervescence]]
* [[Collective memory]]
* [[Collective problem solving]]
* [[Crowd psychology]]
* [[Global Consciousness Project]]
* [[Group behaviour]]
* [[Group mind (science fiction)]]
* [[Knowledge ecosystem]]
* {{annotated link|Noogenesis}}
* [[Open source intelligence]]
* [[Recommendation system]]
* [[Smart mob]]
* [[Social commerce]]
* [[Social information processing]]
* [[Stigmergy]]
* [[Raymond Cattell#Innovations and accomplishments|Syntality]]
* ''[[The Wisdom of Crowds]]''
* [[Think tank]]
* [[Wiki]]
=== Computation and computer science ===
* [[Bees algorithm]]
* [[Cellular automaton]]
* [[Collaborative human interpreter]]
* [[Collaborative software]]
* [[Connectivity (graph theory)]]
* [[Enterprise bookmarking]]
* [[Human-based computation]]
* [[Open-source software]]
* [[Organismic computing]]
* [[Preference elicitation]]
=== Others ===
* [[Customer engagement]]
* [[Dispersed knowledge]]
* [[Distributed cognition]]
* [[Facilitation (business)]]
* [[Facilitator]]
* [[Hundredth monkey effect]]
* [[Keeping up with the Joneses]]
* [[Library]]
* [[Library of Alexandria]]
* [[Meme]]
* [[Open-space meeting]]
{{Div col end}}
== Notes and references ==
{{reflist|30em}}
== Bibliography ==
{{refbegin}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Brown | first=Philip
| last=Brown | first=Philip
第一个菲利普
| last2=Lauder | first2=Hugh
| last2=Lauder | first2=Hugh
2 Lauder | first2 Hugh
| year=2000
| year=2000
2000年
| chapter=Collective intelligence
| chapter=Collective intelligence
集体智慧
|editor=S. Baron |editor2=J. Field |editor3=T Schuller
|editor=S. Baron |editor2=J. Field |editor3=T Schuller
编辑 s。男爵 | 编辑。3 t Schuller
| title=Social Capital: Critical Perspectives
| title=Social Capital: Critical Perspectives
社会资本: 批判的视角
| publisher=Oxford University Press | location=New York |url=https://books.google.com/?id=nvivgiFfPr0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
| publisher=Oxford University Press | location=New York |url=https://books.google.com/?id=nvivgiFfPr0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
2012年10月15日，纽约，牛津 https://books.google.com/?id=nvivgiffpr0c&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage 出版社
| isbn=9780191583247 }}
| isbn=9780191583247 }}
9780191583247}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Brown | first=Philip
| last=Brown | first=Philip
第一个菲利普
| last2=Lauder | first2=Hugh
| last2=Lauder | first2=Hugh
2 Lauder | first2 Hugh
| year=2001
| year=2001
2001年
| chapter=Collective intelligence (chapter 13)
| chapter=Collective intelligence (chapter 13)
| 第十三章集体智慧
|editor=Brown |editor2=Lauder
|editor=Brown |editor2=Lauder
2 Lauder
| title=Capitalism and social progress: the future of society in a global economy
| title=Capitalism and social progress: the future of society in a global economy
| 题目: 资本主义和社会进步: 全球经济中社会的未来
| publisher=Palgrave
| publisher=Palgrave
| 出版商 Palgrave
| url=https://books.google.com/?id=rF8YDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
| url=https://books.google.com/?id=rF8YDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
Https://books.google.com/?id=rf8ydaaaqbaj&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
| isbn=9780333985380 }}
| isbn=9780333985380 }}
9780333985380}
* {{cite journal
| last=Fadul | first=Jose A.
| last=Fadul | first=Jose A.
最后一个法杜尔 | 第一个何塞 a。
| year=2009
| year=2009
2009年
| title=Collective Learning: Applying Distributed Cognition for Collective Intelligence
| title=Collective Learning: Applying Distributed Cognition for Collective Intelligence
集体学习: 应用分布式认知促进集体智慧
| journal=The International Journal of Learning
| journal=The International Journal of Learning
国际学习期刊
| volume = 16
| volume = 16
第16卷
| issue = 4
| issue = 4
第四期
| pages= 211–220
| pages= 211–220
第211-220页
| doi=10.18848/1447-9494/cgp/v16i04/46223
| doi=10.18848/1447-9494/cgp/v16i04/46223
| doi 10.18848 / 1447-9494 / cgp / v16i04 / 46223
}}
}}
}}
* CIA. (2008). [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html ''The World Factbook'']. (accessed 3 September 2008)
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last = Fladerer | first=Johannes-Paul
| last = Fladerer | first=Johannes-Paul
| 最后一个花匠 | 第一个约翰内斯-保罗
| year=2019
| year=2019
2019年
|title=The Wisdom of the Many: How to create Self-Organisation and how to use Collective Intelligence in Companies and in Society From Management to ManagemANT
|title=The Wisdom of the Many: How to create Self-Organisation and how to use Collective Intelligence in Companies and in Society From Management to ManagemANT
| 题目: 多人的智慧: 如何建立自我组织，以及如何在公司和社会中运用集体智慧，从管理到管理
| publisher=BoD
| publisher=BoD
| 出版商 BoD
| location=Norderstedt
| location=Norderstedt
| 位置 Norderstedt
| isbn =978-3750422421
| isbn =978-3750422421
978-3750422421
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Flew | first=Terry
| last=Flew | first=Terry
最后一次飞行 | 第一次特里
| year= 2008
| year= 2008
2008年
| title=New Media: an introduction
| title=New Media: an introduction
| 标题新媒体: 介绍
| publisher=Oxford University Press | location=Melbourne
| publisher=Oxford University Press | location=Melbourne
牛津大学出版社 | 位置: 墨尔本
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Hamann | first=Heiko
| last=Hamann | first=Heiko
最后的哈曼 | 第一个海科
| year=2018
| year=2018
2018年
| title=Swarm Robotics: A Formal Approach
| title=Swarm Robotics: A Formal Approach
标题: 群机器人: 一种正式的方法
| publisher=Springer | location=New York
| publisher=Springer | location=New York
| 出版商 Springer | 位置: 纽约
| url=https://books.google.com/?id=pnNLDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false
| url=https://books.google.com/?id=pnNLDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false
Https://books.google.com/?id=pnnldwaaqbaj&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false
| isbn=9783319745282 }}
| isbn=9783319745282 }}
9783319745282}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Hofstadter | first=Douglas
| last=Hofstadter | first=Douglas
最后的侯世达 | 第一个道格拉斯
| author-link=Douglas Hofstadter
| author-link=Douglas Hofstadter
| 作者链接侯世达
| year=1979
| year=1979
1979年
| title=Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid
| title=Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid
巴赫: 永恒的金色辫子
| publisher=Basic Books | location=New York
| publisher=Basic Books | location=New York
| 出版商 Basic Books | 位置: 纽约
}}
}}
}}
* Leiner, Barry, Cerf, Vinton, Clark, David, Kahn, Robert, Kleinrock, Leonard, Lynch, Daniel, Postel, Jon, Roberts, Larry and Wolff, Stephen. 2003. [http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.shtml ''A Brief History of the Internet'']. Version 3.32 (accessed 3 September 2008)
* Noubel, Jean-François; (2004, rev. 2007), "[http://publishing.yudu.com/Library/Arswi/CollectiveIntelligen/resources/index.htm?skipFlashCheck=true Collective Intelligence: the Invisible Revolution]"
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Por | first=George
| last=Por | first=George
乔治
| year=1995
| year=1995
1995年
| chapter= The Quest for Collective intelligence
| chapter= The Quest for Collective intelligence
寻求集体智慧
| editor=K. Gozdz
| editor=K. Gozdz
编辑 k。Gozdz
| title=Community Building: Renewing Spirit and Learning in Business
| title=Community Building: Renewing Spirit and Learning in Business
社区建设: 在商业中更新精神和学习
| publisher=New Leaders Press | location=San Francisco
| publisher=New Leaders Press | location=San Francisco
出版商 New Leaders 出版社旧金山
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Rheingold | first=Howard
| last=Rheingold | first=Howard
最后的莱茵戈尔德 | 第一个霍华德
| author-link=Howard Rheingold
| author-link=Howard Rheingold
| 作者链接霍华德·莱茵戈德
| year=2002
| year=2002
2002年
| title=Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution
| title=Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution
聪明的暴徒: 下一场社会革命
| publisher=Basic Books
| publisher=Basic Books
| 出版商 Basic Books
| title-link=Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution }}
| title-link=Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution }}
| 标题链接聪明的暴徒: 下一场社会革命}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Ron | first=Sun
| last=Ron | first=Sun
第一个太阳
| year=1979
| year=1979
1979年
| title=Cognition and Multi-Agent Interaction
| title=Cognition and Multi-Agent Interaction
认知与多智能体交互
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
出版商剑桥大学出版社
}}
}}
}}
* Rosenberg, L. (2015). [https://web.archive.org/web/20151027132802/https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/ecal2015/ch117.html Human Swarms, a real time method for Collective Intelligence]. Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Life (ECAL 2015), pp. 658–659.
* {{cite journal | ref=harv
| last=Riedl | first=Christoph
| last=Riedl | first=Christoph
克里斯多夫
| last2=Blohm | first2=Ivo
| last2=Blohm | first2=Ivo
2 Blohm | first2 Ivo
| last3=Leimeister | first3=Jan Marco
| last3=Leimeister | first3=Jan Marco
3 Leimeister | first3 Jan Marco
| last4=Krcmar | first4=Helmut
| last4=Krcmar | first4=Helmut
4 Krcmar | first4 Helmut
| year=2010
| year=2010
2010年
| title=Rating Scales for Collective Intelligence in Innovation Communities: Why Quick and Easy Decision Making Does Not Get It Right | url=http://home.in.tum.de/~riedlc/res/RiedlEtAl2010-ICIS.pdf
| title=Rating Scales for Collective Intelligence in Innovation Communities: Why Quick and Easy Decision Making Does Not Get It Right | url=http://home.in.tum.de/~riedlc/res/RiedlEtAl2010-ICIS.pdf
为什么快速简单的决策没有得到正确的 http://home.in.tum.de/~riedlc/res/riedletal2010-icis.pdf
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite journal
| ref=harv
| ref=harv
不会有事的
| last=Leimeister
| last=Leimeister
最后的莱梅斯特
| first=Jan Marco
| first=Jan Marco
作者: Jan Marco
| year=2010
| year=2010
2010年
| title=Intelligence
| title=Intelligence
| 题目: 情报
| url=http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| url=http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
Http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726084723/http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726084723/http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| 档案-网址 https://web.archive.org/web/20110726084723/http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| url-status=live
| url-status=live
状态直播
| archive-date=2011-07-26
| archive-date=2011-07-26
| 档案-日期2011-07-26
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv | last=Roy Chowdhury | first=Soudip | last2=Rodriguez | first2=Carlos | last3=Daniel | first3=Florian | last4=Casati | first4=Fabio | year=2010 | title=Wisdom-aware computing: on the interactive recommendation of composition knowledge | pages=[https://archive.org/details/serviceorientedc0000maxi/page/144 144–155] | url=https://archive.org/details/serviceorientedc0000maxi/page/144 | isbn=9783642193934 | series=Icsoc'10 }}
* Stephen R. Diasio, Nuria Agell, "The evolution of expertise in decision support technologies: A challenge for organizations," cscwd, pp. 692–697, 2009 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, 2009. https://web.archive.org/web/20121009235747/http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/CSCWD.2009.4968139
* {{cite book|title=Uses and Abuses of Intelligence|editor1-first=Jean|editor1-last=Raven |year=2008|publisher=Royal Fireworks Press|location=Unionville (NY)|isbn=978-0-89824-356-7|lay-url=http://www.rfwp.com/3567.htm|laydate=6 July 2010|ref=harv}}
* Kaiser, C., Kröckel, J., Bodendorf, F. (2010). [https://web.archive.org/web/20120121230742/http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/HICSS.2010.356 Swarm Intelligence for Analyzing Opinions in Online Communities]. Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1–9.
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Radakov | first=Dmitriĭ Viktorovich
| last=Radakov | first=Dmitriĭ Viktorovich
| last=Radakov | first=Dmitriĭ Viktorovich
| year=1973
| year=1973
1973年
|editor=J. Wiley
|editor=J. Wiley
编辑 j。威利
| title=Schooling in the ecology of fish
| title=Schooling in the ecology of fish
| 题目: 鱼类生态中的群落现象
}}
}}
}}
{{refend}}
== External links ==
{{Library resources box}}
* [http://blogofcollectiveintelligence.com/ Blog of Collective Intelligence]
* [http://themp.org GFIS – Global Futures Intelligence System]
* [http://ciresearchinstitute.org CIRI – the Collective Intelligence Research Institute] – a R&D non-profit organization on collective intelligence
* [http://gccsr.org An application of Collective Intelligence for the Global Climate Change Situation Room] designed and implemented by The Millennium Project in Gimcheon, South Korea in 2009.
* [http://scripts.mit.edu/~cci/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page MIT Handbook of Collective Intelligence]
* [http://www.scn.org/commnet/civic-intelligence.html Cultivating Society's Civic Intelligence] Doug Schuler ''Journal of Society, Information and Communication'', vol 4 No. 2.
* Jennifer H. Watkins (2007). [http://escholarship.org/uc/item/8mg0p0zc Prediction Markets as an Aggregation Mechanism for Collective Intelligence] Los Alamos National Laboratory article on Collective Intelligence
* [[Hideyasu Sasaki]] (2010). [https://web.archive.org/web/20101002143636/http://sites.google.com/site/hsasakilab/Home/ijoci/ijoci-vol-1-no-1 International Journal of Organizational and Collective Intelligence (IJOCI)], vol 1 No. 1.
* Olivier Zara, [https://web.archive.org/web/20060306124022/http://www.axiopole.com/pdf/Managing_collective_intelligence.pdf ''Managing Collective Intelligence, Toward a New Corporate Governance''], Axiopole editions, 2004
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20170925233103/http://collectiveintel.net/ The collective intelligence framework], open-source framework for leveraging collective intelligence
* Raimund Minichbauer (2012). [http://eipcp.net/transversal/0112/minichbauer/en Fragmented Collectives. On the Politics of "Collective Intelligence" in Electronic Networks], transversal 01 12, 'unsettling knowledges'
{{Collective animal behaviour}}
{{Human intelligence topics}}
{{Knowledge management}}
{{Semantic Web}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Collective Intelligence}}
[[Category:Collective intelligence| ]]
[[Category:Artificial intelligence]]
Category:Artificial intelligence
类别: 人工智能
[[Category:Multi-robot systems]]
Category:Multi-robot systems
类别: 多机器人系统
<noinclude>
<small>This page was moved from [[wikipedia:en:Collective intelligence]]. Its edit history can be viewed at [[集体智能/edithistory]]</small></noinclude>
[[Category:待整理页面]]
{{Use dmy dates|date=February 2013}}
[[File:CI types1s 2.jpg|thumb|460px|{{center|Types of collective intelligence}}]]
460px|
460px |
{{Group intelligence}}
{{Recommender systems}}
'''Collective intelligence''' ('''CI''') is shared or group intelligence that [[Emergence|emerges]] from the [[collaboration]], collective efforts, and competition of many individuals and appears in [[consensus decision making]]. The term appears in [[sociobiology]], [[political science]] and in context of mass [[peer review]] and [[crowdsourcing]] applications. It may involve [[consensus]], [[social capital]] and formalisms such as [[voting systems]], [[social media]] and other means of quantifying mass activity. Collective IQ is a measure of collective intelligence, although it is often used interchangeably with the term collective intelligence. Collective intelligence has also been attributed to [[bacteria]]<ref name="Nguyen2011">{{cite book|author=Ngoc Thanh Nguyen|title=Transactions on Computational Collective Intelligence III|url=https://books.google.com/?id=RUxv25JFTkkC&pg=PA63|accessdate=11 June 2013|date=25 July 2011|publisher=Springer|isbn=978-3-642-19967-7|page=}}</ref>{{rp|63}} and animals.<ref name="Nguyen2011"/>{{rp|69}}
Collective intelligence (CI) is shared or group intelligence that emerges from the collaboration, collective efforts, and competition of many individuals and appears in consensus decision making. The term appears in sociobiology, political science and in context of mass peer review and crowdsourcing applications. It may involve consensus, social capital and formalisms such as voting systems, social media and other means of quantifying mass activity. Collective IQ is a measure of collective intelligence, although it is often used interchangeably with the term collective intelligence. Collective intelligence has also been attributed to bacteria and animals.
集体智慧(CI)是从许多个体的协作、集体努力和竞争中产生的共享或群体智慧，并出现在共识决策中。这个术语出现在社会生物学、政治科学和大规模同行评议和众包应用的背景下。它可能涉及共识，社会资本和形式主义，如投票系统，社会媒体和其他手段量化大众活动。集体智商是对集体智慧的一种衡量，尽管它经常与集体智慧这个术语互换使用。集体智慧也被归功于细菌和动物。
It can be understood as an [[emergent property]] from the [[synergies]] among: 1) data-[[information]]-knowledge; 2) software-hardware; and 3) experts (those with new insights as well as recognized authorities) that continually learns from feedback to produce just-in-time knowledge for better decisions than these three elements acting alone;<ref>Glenn, Jerome C. Collective Intelligence – One of the Next Big Things, Futura 4/2009, Finnish Society for Futures Studies, Helsinki, Finland</ref> or more narrowly as an emergent property between people and ways of processing information.<ref>Glenn, Jerome C. Chapter 5, 2008 State of the Future. The Millennium Project, Washington, DC 2008</ref> This notion of collective intelligence is referred to as "symbiotic intelligence" by Norman Lee Johnson.<ref>Norman Lee Johnson, [http://CollectiveScience.com Collective Science site]</ref> The concept is used in [[sociology]], [[Prediction market|business]], [[computer science]] and mass communications: it also appears in [[science fiction]]. [[Pierre Lévy]] defines collective intelligence as, "It is a form of universally distributed intelligence, constantly enhanced, coordinated in real time, and resulting in the effective mobilization of skills. I'll add the following indispensable characteristic to this definition: The basis and goal of collective intelligence is mutual recognition and enrichment of individuals rather than the cult of fetishized or [[hypostatized]] communities."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Levy|first=Pierre|url=https://books.google.com/?id=yPNGswEACAAJ|title=Collective Intelligence|date=1999-12-10|publisher=Basic Books|isbn=978-0-7382-0261-7|location=|pages=14|language=en|oclc=249995946}}</ref> According to researchers Pierre Lévy and [[Derrick de Kerckhove]], it refers to capacity of networked [[ICTs]] (Information communication technologies) to enhance the collective pool of social knowledge by simultaneously expanding the extent of human interactions.<ref>Flew, Terry ''New Media: An Introduction''. Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 21</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Lévy|first=Pierre|last2=Farley|first2=Art|last3=Lollini|first3=Massimo|date=2019-12-31|title=Collective Intelligence, the Future of Internet and the IEML: Interview to Pierre Lévy by Art Farley and Massimo Lollini|url=http://journals.oregondigital.org/index.php/hsda/article/view/4620|journal=Humanist Studies & the Digital Age|language=en|volume=6|issue=1|pages=5–31|doi=10.5399/uo/hsda.6.1.2|issn=2158-3846|doi-access=free}}</ref>
It can be understood as an emergent property from the synergies among: 1) data-information-knowledge; 2) software-hardware; and 3) experts (those with new insights as well as recognized authorities) that continually learns from feedback to produce just-in-time knowledge for better decisions than these three elements acting alone; or more narrowly as an emergent property between people and ways of processing information. This notion of collective intelligence is referred to as "symbiotic intelligence" by Norman Lee Johnson. The concept is used in sociology, business, computer science and mass communications: it also appears in science fiction. Pierre Lévy defines collective intelligence as, "It is a form of universally distributed intelligence, constantly enhanced, coordinated in real time, and resulting in the effective mobilization of skills. I'll add the following indispensable characteristic to this definition: The basis and goal of collective intelligence is mutual recognition and enrichment of individuals rather than the cult of fetishized or hypostatized communities." According to researchers Pierre Lévy and Derrick de Kerckhove, it refers to capacity of networked ICTs (Information communication technologies) to enhance the collective pool of social knowledge by simultaneously expanding the extent of human interactions.
它可以被理解为: 1)数据-信息-知识; 2)软件-硬件; 3)专家(那些有新见解和公认权威的人)之间的协同作用产生的一个涌现性质，他们不断地从反馈中学习，以产生及时的知识，从而做出比这三个要素单独作用更好的决定; 或者更狭义地说，是人与信息处理方式之间的一个涌现性质。这种集体智慧的概念被诺曼 · 李 · 约翰逊称为“共生智慧”。这个概念被用于社会学、商业、计算机科学和大众传播: 它也出现在科幻小说中。Pierre l vy 将集体智慧定义为，“它是一种普遍分布的智慧形式，不断增强，实时协调，并导致技能的有效动员。我将在这个定义中增加以下不可或缺的特征: 集体智慧的基础和目标是个人的相互承认和丰富，而不是崇拜或实体化的社区根据研究人员 Pierre l vy 和 Derrick de Kerckhove 的说法，它指的是网络化的信息通信技术(信息通信技术)的能力，通过同时扩大人类互动的范围来加强集体的社会知识库。
Collective intelligence strongly contributes to the shift of knowledge and power from the individual to the collective. According to [[Eric S. Raymond]] (1998) and JC Herz (2005), [[open source]] intelligence will eventually generate superior outcomes to knowledge generated by proprietary software developed within corporations ([[Terry Flew|Flew]] 2008). Media theorist [[Henry Jenkins]] sees collective intelligence as an 'alternative source of media power', related to convergence culture. He draws attention to education and the way people are learning to participate in knowledge cultures outside formal learning settings. Henry Jenkins criticizes schools which promote 'autonomous problem solvers and self-contained learners' while remaining hostile to learning through the means of collective intelligence.<ref>Jenkins, ''Henry Convergence Culture: Where old and new media collide''. New York: New York University Press, 2006, p. 259</ref> Both Pierre Lévy (2007) and Henry Jenkins (2008) support the claim that collective intelligence is important for [[democratization]], as it is interlinked with knowledge-based culture and sustained by collective idea sharing, and thus contributes to a better understanding of diverse society.
Collective intelligence strongly contributes to the shift of knowledge and power from the individual to the collective. According to Eric S. Raymond (1998) and JC Herz (2005), open source intelligence will eventually generate superior outcomes to knowledge generated by proprietary software developed within corporations (Flew 2008). Media theorist Henry Jenkins sees collective intelligence as an 'alternative source of media power', related to convergence culture. He draws attention to education and the way people are learning to participate in knowledge cultures outside formal learning settings. Henry Jenkins criticizes schools which promote 'autonomous problem solvers and self-contained learners' while remaining hostile to learning through the means of collective intelligence. Both Pierre Lévy (2007) and Henry Jenkins (2008) support the claim that collective intelligence is important for democratization, as it is interlinked with knowledge-based culture and sustained by collective idea sharing, and thus contributes to a better understanding of diverse society.
集体智慧有力地促进了知识和权力从个人向集体的转移。根据 Eric s. Raymond (1998)和 JC Herz (2005)的说法，开源智能最终将产生比企业内部开发的专有软件智能产生的知识更好的结果(Flew 2008)。媒体理论家亨利 · 詹金斯认为集体智慧是一种与趋同文化相关的“媒体力量的替代来源”。他提请注意教育和人们学习参与正式学习环境之外的知识文化的方式。亨利•詹金斯批评那些提倡“自主解决问题者和自足型学习者” ，却对通过集体智慧的方式学习持敌对态度的学校。Pierre l vy (2007)和 Henry Jenkins (2008)都支持这样的主张，即集体智慧对民主化很重要，因为它与以知识为基础的文化相互联系，并通过集体思想共享得以维持，从而有助于更好地理解多样化社会。
Similar to the [[G factor (psychometrics)|''g'' factor (''g'')]] for general individual intelligence, a new scientific understanding of collective intelligence aims to extract a general collective intelligence factor '''c factor''' for groups indicating a group's ability to perform a wide range of tasks.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Woolley|first=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|date=2010-10-29|title=Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups|journal=Science|volume=330|issue=6004|pages=686–688|doi=10.1126/science.1193147|pmid=20929725|bibcode=2010Sci...330..686W|url=https://semanticscholar.org/paper/2816dd942e1b2f41c3708c32ccb13e6f24235c72}}</ref> Definition, operationalization and statistical methods are derived from ''g''. Similarly as ''g'' is highly interrelated with the concept of [[Intelligence quotient|IQ]],<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|date=1992|title=Understanding g in terms of information processing|url=|journal=Educational Psychology Review |volume=4 |issue=3|pages=271–308|doi=10.1007/bf01417874|pmid=}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite book|title=The g factor: The science of mental ability.|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|publisher=Praeger|year=1998|isbn=|location=Westport, CT|pages=}}</ref> this measurement of collective intelligence can be interpreted as intelligence quotient for groups (Group-IQ) even though the score is not a quotient per se. Causes for ''c'' and predictive validity are investigated as well.
Similar to the g factor (g) for general individual intelligence, a new scientific understanding of collective intelligence aims to extract a general collective intelligence factor c factor for groups indicating a group's ability to perform a wide range of tasks. Definition, operationalization and statistical methods are derived from g. Similarly as g is highly interrelated with the concept of IQ, this measurement of collective intelligence can be interpreted as intelligence quotient for groups (Group-IQ) even though the score is not a quotient per se. Causes for c and predictive validity are investigated as well.
与一般个人智力的 g 因子(g)类似，对集体智力的新的科学理解旨在为群体提取一般的集体智力因子 c 因子，表明一个群体执行广泛任务的能力。定义，操作主义和统计方法来源于 g 类似于 g 与 IQ 的概念高度相关，这种集体智力的测量可以解释为群体的智商，即使分数本身不是商。此外，还对 c 的原因和预测效度进行了调查。
Collective intelligence is used to help create widely known platforms including [[Google]], Wikipedia and [[political groups]]. Google is a major search engine that is made of millions of websites that have been created by people all around the world. It has the ability to share knowledge and creativity with each other to collaborate and expand thoughts and expressions. Google includes five key dynamics within their teams to create a well-collaborated system. Dynamics include [[psychological safety]], [[dependability]], structure & clarity, meaning of work and impact of work.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/|title=re:Work - The five keys to a successful Google team|website=rework.withgoogle.com|language=en|access-date=2020-04-06}}</ref> Their ideas behind their rediscovery of collective intelligence is to ensure that all workers can express themselves without any fear of potential embarrassment.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://collectiveintelligence.ca/google-rediscovers-collective-intelligence/|title=Google (re)discovers collective intelligence|date=2018-04-10|website=Collective Intelligence|language=en-US|access-date=2020-04-06}}</ref> Google's teamwork is said to be one of the main reasons for their success by including the use of emotional and collective intelligence to ensure teamwork is involved in any discussions.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.inc.com/robin-camarote/google-study-reveals-emotional-intelligence-on-teams-determines-success.html|title=What Google's New Emotional Intelligence Study Says About Teamwork and Success|last=Camarote|first=Robin|date=2016-03-14|website=Inc.com|access-date=2020-04-06}}</ref> The system behind Google exemplifies the combining of knowledge of the web-to-people not just knowledge of people-to-people.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/legacy/forums/collective_intelligence.html|title=Collective Intelligence|website=web.mit.edu|access-date=2020-04-06}}</ref>
Collective intelligence is used to help create widely known platforms including Google, Wikipedia and political groups. Google is a major search engine that is made of millions of websites that have been created by people all around the world. It has the ability to share knowledge and creativity with each other to collaborate and expand thoughts and expressions. Google includes five key dynamics within their teams to create a well-collaborated system. Dynamics include psychological safety, dependability, structure & clarity, meaning of work and impact of work. Their ideas behind their rediscovery of collective intelligence is to ensure that all workers can express themselves without any fear of potential embarrassment. Google's teamwork is said to be one of the main reasons for their success by including the use of emotional and collective intelligence to ensure teamwork is involved in any discussions. The system behind Google exemplifies the combining of knowledge of the web-to-people not just knowledge of people-to-people.
集体智慧被用来帮助创建广为人知的平台，包括谷歌、维基百科和政治团体。谷歌是一个主要的搜索引擎，由世界各地的人们创建的数百万个网站组成。它具有相互分享知识和创造力的能力，以协作和扩大思想和表达。谷歌在他们的团队中包含了五个关键的动力来创建一个良好合作的系统。动力包括心理安全感、可靠性、结构清晰度、工作意义和工作影响力。他们重新发现集体智慧背后的想法是，确保所有员工都能表达自己的观点，而不用担心可能出现的尴尬。谷歌的团队合作被认为是他们成功的主要原因之一，因为他们运用情感和集体智慧来确保团队合作参与任何讨论。谷歌背后的系统体现了网络知识与人之间的结合，而不仅仅是人与人之间的知识。
Writers who have influenced the idea of collective intelligence include [[Francis Galton]], [[Douglas Hofstadter]] (1979), Peter Russell (1983), [[Tom Atlee]] (1993), [[Pierre Lévy (philosopher)|Pierre Lévy]] (1994), [[Howard Bloom]] (1995), [[Francis Heylighen]] (1995), [[Douglas Engelbart]], [[Louis Rosenberg (entrepreneur)|Louis Rosenberg]], [[Cliff Joslyn]], [[Ron Dembo]], [[Gottfried Mayer-Kress]] (2003).
Writers who have influenced the idea of collective intelligence include Francis Galton, Douglas Hofstadter (1979), Peter Russell (1983), Tom Atlee (1993), Pierre Lévy (1994), Howard Bloom (1995), Francis Heylighen (1995), Douglas Engelbart, Louis Rosenberg, Cliff Joslyn, Ron Dembo, Gottfried Mayer-Kress (2003).
影响集体智慧观念的作家包括 Francis Galton，侯世达(1979) ，Peter Russell (1983) ，Tom Atlee (1993) ，Pierre l vy (1994) ，Howard Bloom (1995) ，Francis Heylighen (1995) ，道格拉斯·恩格尔巴特，Louis Rosenberg，Cliff Joslyn，Ron Dembo，Gottfried Mayer-Kress (2003)。
{{TOC limit|3}}
== History ==
[[File:World Brain HG Wells 1938.jpg|left|thumb|H.G. Wells ''World Brain'' (1936–1938)]]
H.G. Wells World Brain (1936–1938)
H.g.威尔士世界大脑(1936-1938)
The concept (although not so named) originated in 1785 with the [[Marquis de Condorcet]], whose "jury theorem" states that if each member of a voting group is more likely than not to make a correct decision, the probability that the highest vote of the group is the correct decision increases with the number of members of the group (see [[Condorcet's jury theorem]]).<ref>{{cite book|last1=Landemore|first1=Hélène|title=Landemore, Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many|date=2012|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton|url=https://books.google.com/?id=B-6YNnIIlE8C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage|isbn=978-0691155654}}</ref> Many theorists have interpreted [[Aristotle]]'s statement in the [[Politics]] that "a feast to which many contribute is better than a dinner provided out of a single purse" to mean that just as many may bring different dishes to the table, so in a deliberation many may contribute different pieces of information to generate a better decision.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Waldron|first1=Jeremy|title=The Wisdom of the Multitude: Some Reflections on Book 3, Chapter 11 of Aristotle's Politics|journal=Political Theory|date=1995|volume=23|issue=4|pages=563–584|doi=10.1177/0090591795023004001}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Ober|first1=Josiah|title=Democracy and Knowledge|date=2008|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton, N.J.|pages=110–14}}</ref> Recent scholarship,<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Cammack|first1=Daniela|title=Aristotle and the Virtue of the Multitude|journal=Political Theory|date=2013|volume=41|issue=2|pages=175–202|doi=10.1177/0090591712470423|url=https://zenodo.org/record/1063691}}</ref> however, suggests that this was probably not what Aristotle meant but is a modern interpretation based on what we now know about team intelligence.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Page|first1=Scott|title=The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies|date=2008|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton}}</ref>
The concept (although not so named) originated in 1785 with the Marquis de Condorcet, whose "jury theorem" states that if each member of a voting group is more likely than not to make a correct decision, the probability that the highest vote of the group is the correct decision increases with the number of members of the group (see Condorcet's jury theorem). Many theorists have interpreted Aristotle's statement in the Politics that "a feast to which many contribute is better than a dinner provided out of a single purse" to mean that just as many may bring different dishes to the table, so in a deliberation many may contribute different pieces of information to generate a better decision. Recent scholarship, however, suggests that this was probably not what Aristotle meant but is a modern interpretation based on what we now know about team intelligence.
这个概念(虽然没有这样命名)起源于1785年的美国马奎斯·孔多塞，其“陪审团定理”指出，如果一个投票群体中的每个成员更有可能做出一个正确的决定，那么该群体中得票最多的成员做出正确决定的概率随着该群体成员数的增加而增加(见 Condorcet 的陪审团定理)。许多理论家将亚里士多德在《政治学》中的一句话解释为“多人参与的盛宴胜过一个钱包提供的晚餐” ，这意味着正如许多人可以将不同的菜肴端上餐桌，所以在商议中许多人可以贡献不同的信息来产生一个更好的决定。然而，最近的学术研究表明，这可能不是亚里士多德的意思，而是基于我们现在所知道的团队智力的现代解释。
A precursor of the concept is found in entomologist [[William Morton Wheeler]]'s observation that seemingly independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism (1910).<ref>Wheeler, W. M. (1910). Ants: their structure, development and behavior (Vol. 9). Columbia University Press.</ref> Wheeler saw this collaborative process at work in [[ants]] that acted like the cells of a single beast he called a [[superorganism]].
A precursor of the concept is found in entomologist William Morton Wheeler's observation that seemingly independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism (1910). Wheeler saw this collaborative process at work in ants that acted like the cells of a single beast he called a superorganism.
这个概念的先驱是在昆虫学家威廉·莫顿·惠勒的观察中发现的，表面上看起来独立的个体可以如此紧密地合作，以至于变得与一个生物体无法区分(1910)。惠勒在蚂蚁身上看到了这种协作过程，蚂蚁的行为就像一头被他称为超个体的野兽的细胞。
In 1912 [[Émile Durkheim]] identified society as the sole source of human logical thought. He argued in "[[The Elementary Forms of Religious Life]]" that society constitutes a higher intelligence because it transcends the individual over space and time.<ref>Émile Durkheim, ''The Elementary Forms of Religious Life'', 1912.</ref> Other antecedents are [[Vladimir Vernadsky]] and [[Pierre Teilhard de Chardin]]'s concept of "[[noosphere]]" and [[H.G. Wells]]'s concept of "[[world brain]]" (see also the term "[[global brain]]"). Peter Russell, [[Elisabet Sahtouris]], and [[Barbara Marx Hubbard]] (originator of the term "conscious evolution")<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://barbaramarxhubbard.com/book/|title=About the Book – Foundation for Conscious Evolution|newspaper=Foundation for Conscious Evolution|access-date=2016-12-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170218124636/http://barbaramarxhubbard.com/book/|archive-date=18 February 2017|url-status=dead}}</ref> are inspired by the visions of a noosphere – a transcendent, rapidly evolving collective intelligence – an informational cortex of the planet. The notion has more recently been examined by the philosopher Pierre Lévy. In a 1962 research report, [[Douglas Engelbart]] linked collective intelligence to organizational effectiveness, and predicted that pro-actively 'augmenting human intellect' would yield a multiplier effect in group problem solving: "Three people working together in this augmented mode [would] seem to be more than three times as effective in solving a complex problem as is one augmented person working alone".<ref>Engelbart, Douglas (1962) [http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-3906.html#3b9 Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110504035147/http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-3906.html#3b9 |date=4 May 2011 }} – section on Team Cooperation</ref> In 1994, he coined the term 'collective IQ' as a measure of collective intelligence, to focus attention on the opportunity to significantly raise collective IQ in business and society.<ref>Engelbart, Douglas (1994)[https://archive.org/stream/boostingcollecti00drdo#page/n9/mode/2up Boosting Collective IQ] (Slide Handouts) – 'Collective IQ' defined on Slide 4; also (1994) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdIWQZtEq04&t=1016 BBN Distinguished Guest Lecture] (Video) – 'Collective IQ' defined @16:56 "CoDIAK"</ref>
In 1912 Émile Durkheim identified society as the sole source of human logical thought. He argued in "The Elementary Forms of Religious Life" that society constitutes a higher intelligence because it transcends the individual over space and time. Other antecedents are Vladimir Vernadsky and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's concept of "noosphere" and H.G. Wells's concept of "world brain" (see also the term "global brain"). Peter Russell, Elisabet Sahtouris, and Barbara Marx Hubbard (originator of the term "conscious evolution") are inspired by the visions of a noosphere – a transcendent, rapidly evolving collective intelligence – an informational cortex of the planet. The notion has more recently been examined by the philosopher Pierre Lévy. In a 1962 research report, Douglas Engelbart linked collective intelligence to organizational effectiveness, and predicted that pro-actively 'augmenting human intellect' would yield a multiplier effect in group problem solving: "Three people working together in this augmented mode [would] seem to be more than three times as effective in solving a complex problem as is one augmented person working alone". In 1994, he coined the term 'collective IQ' as a measure of collective intelligence, to focus attention on the opportunity to significantly raise collective IQ in business and society.
1912年，涂尔干认为社会是人类逻辑思维的唯一来源。他在《宗教生活的基本形式》一书中认为，社会构成了一种更高级的智慧，因为它超越了个人的空间和时间。其他先行词还有复杂系统和德日进的“人圈”概念和 h.g。威尔斯的“世界大脑”的概念(也见术语“全球大脑”)。彼得•罗素(Peter Russell)、伊丽莎白•萨图里斯(Elisabet Sahtouris)和芭芭拉•马克思•哈伯德(Barbara Marx Hubbard)(“有意识进化”(conscious evolution)一词的创始人)的灵感来自人类圈——一种超验的、快速进化的集体智慧——地球的信息皮层。最近，哲学家皮埃尔 · l · 维对这一概念进行了检验。在1962年的一份研究报告中，道格拉斯·恩格尔巴特将集体智慧与组织效能联系起来，并预测积极主动的‘增强人类智力’将在解决团队问题中产生乘数效应: “在这种增强模式下，三个人一起工作，解决复杂问题的效率似乎是一个增强人单独工作的效率的三倍多。”。1994年，他创造了集体智商这一术语作为集体智商的衡量标准，将注意力集中在显著提高商业和社会集体智商的机会上。
The idea of collective intelligence also forms the framework for contemporary democratic theories often referred to as [[epistemic democracy]]. Epistemic democratic theories refer to the capacity of the populace, either through deliberation or aggregation of knowledge, to track the truth and relies on mechanisms to synthesize and apply collective intelligence.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Landemore|first1=Helene|title=Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many|date=2013|publisher=Princeton University Press|url=https://books.google.com/?id=B-6YNnIIlE8C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage|isbn=978-0691155654}}</ref>
The idea of collective intelligence also forms the framework for contemporary democratic theories often referred to as epistemic democracy. Epistemic democratic theories refer to the capacity of the populace, either through deliberation or aggregation of knowledge, to track the truth and relies on mechanisms to synthesize and apply collective intelligence.
集体智慧的思想也形成了当代民主理论的框架，通常被称为认知民主。认知民主理论是指民众通过审议或聚集知识来追踪真相的能力，并依靠机制来综合和应用集体智慧。
Collective intelligence was introduced into the machine learning community in the late 20th century,<ref name="Wolpert arXiv:cs/9905004">{{Cite journal|last=Wolpert|first=David H.|last2=Tumer|first2=Kagan|last3=Frank|first3=Jeremy|date=1999-05-10|title=Using Collective Intelligence to Route Internet Traffic|journal=Advances in Information Processing Systems, Eds M. Kearns, S. Solla, D. Cohn, MIT Press|volume=11|issue=1999|pages=arXiv:cs/9905004|arxiv=cs/9905004|bibcode=1999cs........5004W}}</ref> and matured into a broader consideration of how to design "collectives" of self-interested adaptive agents to meet a system-wide goal.<ref>{{cite journal|last2=Tumer|first2=Kagan|last1=Wolpert|first1=David|title=Collective Intelligence, Data Routing and Braess' Paradox"Volume=16|pages=359–387|date=2004|journal=Journal of Artficial Intelligence Research}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Tumer|first1=Kagan|last2=Wolpert|first2=David|title=Collectives and the design of complex systems|date=2004|publisher=Springer}}</ref> This was related to single-agent work on "reward shaping"<ref>{{cite article|last1=Ng|first1=Andrew|last2=Harada|first2=Daishi|last3=Russell|first3=Stuart|title=Policy Invariance Under Reward Transformations: Theory and Application to Reward Shaping|date=1999|publisher=ICML '99 Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Machine Learning}}</ref> and has been taken forward by numerous researchers in
Collective intelligence was introduced into the machine learning community in the late 20th century, and matured into a broader consideration of how to design "collectives" of self-interested adaptive agents to meet a system-wide goal. This was related to single-agent work on "reward shaping" and has been taken forward by numerous researchers in
集体智能在20世纪后期被引入机器学习领域，并成熟为如何设计自利自适应代理的“集体”以满足系统范围的目标的更广泛的思考。这与单个代理人的“奖赏塑造”工作有关，并在年被众多研究人员所推动
the game theory and engineering communities.<ref>{{cite article|last1=Marden|first1=Jason|last2=Shamma|first2=Jeff|title=Game Theoretic Learning in Distributed Control|date=2017|publisher=Handbook of Dynamic Game Theory|url=https://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~jrmarden/files/Learning-Chapter.pdf}}</ref>
the game theory and engineering communities.
博弈论和工程社区。
== Dimensions ==
[[File:Complex adaptive system.gif|thumb|Complex adaptive systems model]]
Complex adaptive systems model
复杂自适应系统模型
[[Howard Bloom]] has discussed mass behavior – [[collective behavior]] from the level of quarks to the level of bacterial, plant, animal, and human societies. He stresses the biological adaptations that have turned most of this earth's living beings into components of what he calls "a learning machine". In 1986 Bloom combined the concepts of [[apoptosis]], [[parallel distributed processing]], [[group selection]], and the superorganism to produce a theory of how collective intelligence works.<ref>Howard Bloom, ''The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces of History'', 1995</ref> Later he showed how the collective intelligences of competing bacterial colonies and human societies can be explained in terms of computer-generated "[[complex adaptive systems]]" and the "[[genetic algorithms]]", concepts pioneered by [[John Henry Holland|John Holland]].<ref name="bloom2000"/>
Howard Bloom has discussed mass behavior – collective behavior from the level of quarks to the level of bacterial, plant, animal, and human societies. He stresses the biological adaptations that have turned most of this earth's living beings into components of what he calls "a learning machine". In 1986 Bloom combined the concepts of apoptosis, parallel distributed processing, group selection, and the superorganism to produce a theory of how collective intelligence works. Later he showed how the collective intelligences of competing bacterial colonies and human societies can be explained in terms of computer-generated "complex adaptive systems" and the "genetic algorithms", concepts pioneered by John Holland.
霍华德 · 布鲁姆讨论了从夸克层次到细菌、植物、动物和人类社会层次的大规模行为-集体行为。他强调了生物学上的适应性，这种适应性把地球上的大多数生物变成了他所说的“学习机器”的组成部分。1986年，Bloom 将细胞凋亡、并行分布处理、群体选择和超个体等概念结合起来，提出了集体智慧是如何工作的理论。随后，他展示了如何用计算机生成的“复杂适应系统”和约翰 · 霍兰德率先提出的“遗传算法”来解释竞争细菌群落和人类社会的集体智能。
Bloom traced the evolution of collective intelligence to our bacterial ancestors 1 billion years ago and demonstrated how a multi-species intelligence has worked since the beginning of life.<ref name="bloom2000">Howard Bloom, ''Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century'', 2000</ref> Ant societies exhibit more intelligence, in terms of technology, than any other animal except for humans and co-operate in keeping livestock, for example [[aphid]]s for "milking".<ref name="bloom2000" /> Leaf cutters care for fungi and carry leaves to feed the fungi.<ref name="bloom2000" />
Bloom traced the evolution of collective intelligence to our bacterial ancestors 1 billion years ago and demonstrated how a multi-species intelligence has worked since the beginning of life. Ant societies exhibit more intelligence, in terms of technology, than any other animal except for humans and co-operate in keeping livestock, for example aphids for "milking". Leaf cutters care for fungi and carry leaves to feed the fungi.
布鲁姆追溯集体智慧的进化可以追溯到10亿年前我们的细菌祖先，并演示了从生命开始以来多物种智慧是如何工作的。就技术而言，除了人类以外，蚂蚁社会比其他任何动物都更加聪明，在饲养家畜方面也更加合作，例如用于“挤奶”的蚜虫。切叶者照顾真菌，并携带叶子喂养真菌。
[[David Skrbina]]<ref>Skrbina, D., 2001, [https://web.archive.org/web/20110604164440/http://www.bath.ac.uk/carpp/publications/doc_theses_links/pdf/dt_ds_chapter8.pdf Participation, Organization, and Mind: Toward a Participatory Worldview], ch. 8, Doctoral Thesis, Centre for Action Research in Professional Practice, School of Management, University of Bath: England</ref> cites the concept of a 'group mind' as being derived from Plato's concept of [[panpsychism]] (that mind or consciousness is omnipresent and exists in all matter). He develops the concept of a 'group mind' as articulated by [[Thomas Hobbes]] in "Leviathan" and [[Gustav Fechner|Fechner]]'s arguments for a [[collective consciousness]] of mankind. He cites [[Émile Durkheim|Durkheim]] as the most notable advocate of a "collective consciousness"<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=Er3lCAAAQBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=david+skrbina+durkheim#v=onepage|title=Authenticity, Autonomy and Multiculturalism|last=Levey|first=Geoffrey Brahm|date=2015-05-01|publisher=Routledge|isbn=9781317535928}}</ref> and [[Teilhard de Chardin]] as a thinker who has developed the philosophical implications of the group mind.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Panpsychism in the West|last=Skrbina|first=David F.|date=2007-01-26|publisher=The MIT Press|isbn=9780262693516|edition=1}}</ref>
David Skrbina cites the concept of a 'group mind' as being derived from Plato's concept of panpsychism (that mind or consciousness is omnipresent and exists in all matter). He develops the concept of a 'group mind' as articulated by Thomas Hobbes in "Leviathan" and Fechner's arguments for a collective consciousness of mankind. He cites Durkheim as the most notable advocate of a "collective consciousness" and Teilhard de Chardin as a thinker who has developed the philosophical implications of the group mind.
大卫 · 斯科比纳引用了“群体心智”的概念，认为这个概念来源于柏拉图的泛心理学(心智或意识无处不在，存在于所有物质中)。他发展了托马斯 · 霍布斯在《利维坦》和费希纳关于人类集体意识的论证中阐述的“群体心智”的概念。他认为涂尔干是“集体意识”最著名的倡导者，而 Chardin 是一位发展了集体意识的哲学含义的思想家。
Tom Atlee focuses primarily on humans and on work to upgrade what Howard Bloom calls "the group IQ". Atlee feels that collective intelligence can be encouraged "to overcome '[[groupthink]]' and individual [[cognitive bias]] in order to allow a collective to cooperate on one process – while achieving enhanced intellectual performance." George Pór defined the collective intelligence phenomenon as "the capacity of human communities to evolve towards higher order complexity and harmony, through such innovation mechanisms as differentiation and integration, competition and collaboration."<ref>George Pór, [http://www.community-intelligence.com/blogs/public Blog of Collective Intelligence] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040802231025/http://www.community-intelligence.com/blogs/public |date=2 August 2004 }}</ref> Atlee and Pór state that "collective intelligence also involves achieving a single focus of attention and standard of metrics which provide an appropriate threshold of action".<ref name=":20">{{Cite web|url=http://community-intelligence.com/files/Atlee%20-%20Por%20-%20CI%20as%20a%20Field%20of%20multidisciplinary%20study%20and%20practice%20.pdf|title=Collective Intelligence as a Field of Multi‐disciplinary Study and Practice|last=Atlee|first=Tom|date=|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=December 11, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161220200827/http://community-intelligence.com/files/Atlee%20-%20Por%20-%20CI%20as%20a%20Field%20of%20multidisciplinary%20study%20and%20practice%20.pdf|archive-date=20 December 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> Their approach is rooted in [[scientific community metaphor]].<ref name=":20" />
Tom Atlee focuses primarily on humans and on work to upgrade what Howard Bloom calls "the group IQ". Atlee feels that collective intelligence can be encouraged "to overcome 'groupthink' and individual cognitive bias in order to allow a collective to cooperate on one process – while achieving enhanced intellectual performance." George Pór defined the collective intelligence phenomenon as "the capacity of human communities to evolve towards higher order complexity and harmony, through such innovation mechanisms as differentiation and integration, competition and collaboration." Atlee and Pór state that "collective intelligence also involves achieving a single focus of attention and standard of metrics which provide an appropriate threshold of action". Their approach is rooted in scientific community metaphor.
汤姆 · 阿特利主要关注人类和提升霍华德 · 布鲁姆所说的“群智商”的工作。艾特利认为，可以鼓励集体智慧“克服‘群体思维’和个人认知偏见，以便允许集体在一个过程中进行合作——同时提高智力表现。”乔治 · 皮尔将集体智慧现象定义为“人类社会通过差异化与整合、竞争与协作等创新机制向高阶复杂性与和谐发展的能力”Atlee 和 pr 指出，”集体智慧还包括实现单一关注焦点和提供适当行动阈值的衡量标准”。他们的方法植根于科学共同体的隐喻。
The term group intelligence is sometimes used interchangeably with the term collective intelligence. Anita Woolley presents Collective intelligence as a measure of group intelligence and group creativity.<ref name=":0" /> The idea is that a measure of collective intelligence covers a broad range of features of the group, mainly group composition and group interaction.<ref name=":11" /> The features of composition that lead to increased levels of collective intelligence in groups include criteria such as higher numbers of women in the group as well as increased diversity of the group.<ref name=":11"/>
The term group intelligence is sometimes used interchangeably with the term collective intelligence. Anita Woolley presents Collective intelligence as a measure of group intelligence and group creativity. The idea is that a measure of collective intelligence covers a broad range of features of the group, mainly group composition and group interaction. The features of composition that lead to increased levels of collective intelligence in groups include criteria such as higher numbers of women in the group as well as increased diversity of the group.
群体智慧这个术语有时与集体智慧这个术语可以互换使用。安妮塔 · 伍利将集体智慧作为衡量群体智慧和群体创造力的标准。这种观点认为，集体智慧的衡量标准涵盖了群体的广泛特征，主要是群体组成和群体互动。导致群体集体智慧水平提高的组成特征包括群体中妇女人数较多以及群体多样性增加等标准。
Atlee and Pór suggest that the field of collective intelligence should primarily be seen as a human enterprise in which mind-sets, a willingness to share and an openness to the value of distributed intelligence for the common good are paramount, though group theory and [[artificial intelligence]] have something to offer.<ref name=":20" /> Individuals who respect collective intelligence are confident of their own abilities and recognize that the whole is indeed greater than the sum of any individual parts.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Leimeister|first=Jan Marco|date=2010-06-24|title=Collective Intelligence|journal=Business & Information Systems Engineering|volume=2|issue=4|pages=245–248|doi=10.1007/s12599-010-0114-8|url=http://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/export/DL/221423.pdf}}</ref> Maximizing collective intelligence relies on the ability of an organization to accept and develop "The Golden Suggestion", which is any potentially useful input from any member.<ref name=":21" /> [[Groupthink]] often hampers collective intelligence by limiting input to a select few individuals or filtering potential Golden Suggestions without fully developing them to implementation.<ref name=":20" />
Atlee and Pór suggest that the field of collective intelligence should primarily be seen as a human enterprise in which mind-sets, a willingness to share and an openness to the value of distributed intelligence for the common good are paramount, though group theory and artificial intelligence have something to offer. Maximizing collective intelligence relies on the ability of an organization to accept and develop "The Golden Suggestion", which is any potentially useful input from any member. Groupthink often hampers collective intelligence by limiting input to a select few individuals or filtering potential Golden Suggestions without fully developing them to implementation.
阿特里和皮尔认为，集体智慧领域首先应该被看作是一个人类企业，其中最重要的是思维定势、愿意分享以及对分布式智能的价值持开放态度，以实现共同利益，尽管群体理论和人工智能可以提供一些东西。集体智慧的最大化依赖于一个组织接受和发展“黄金建议”的能力，这是任何成员提供的任何潜在有用的投入。群体思维通常会限制对少数人的输入，或者过滤潜在的黄金建议，从而阻碍集体智慧的发展。
[[Robert David Steele Vivas]] in ''The New Craft of Intelligence'' portrayed all citizens as "intelligence minutemen," drawing only on legal and ethical sources of information, able to create a "public intelligence" that keeps public officials and corporate managers honest, turning the concept of "national intelligence" (previously concerned about spies and secrecy) on its head.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The New Craft of Intelligence: Personal, Public, & Political—Citizen's Action Handbook for Fighting Terrorism, Genocide, Disease, Toxic Bombs, & Corruption|last=Steele|first=Robert David|date=2002-04-08|publisher=Oss Pr|isbn=9780971566118|location=Oakton, Va.}}</ref>
Robert David Steele Vivas in The New Craft of Intelligence portrayed all citizens as "intelligence minutemen," drawing only on legal and ethical sources of information, able to create a "public intelligence" that keeps public officials and corporate managers honest, turning the concept of "national intelligence" (previously concerned about spies and secrecy) on its head.
在《情报的新工艺》一书中，罗伯特·大卫·斯蒂尔 · 维瓦斯将所有公民描绘成“情报一分钟人” ，仅仅依靠法律和道德信息来源，能够创造一种“公共情报” ，使公职人员和企业管理人员保持诚实，颠覆了“国家情报”(以前关注间谍和保密)的概念。
[[File:Mass_collaboration.jpg|thumb|Stigmergic Collaboration: a theoretical framework for mass collaboration]]
Stigmergic Collaboration: a theoretical framework for mass collaboration
创新协作: 大众协作的理论框架
According to [[Don Tapscott]] and [[Anthony D. Williams (author)|Anthony D. Williams]], collective intelligence is [[mass collaboration]]. In order for this concept to happen, four principles need to exist;<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
According to Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams, collective intelligence is mass collaboration. In order for this concept to happen, four principles need to exist;
按照 Don Tapscott 和 Anthony d. Williams 的说法，集体智慧就是大规模的合作。要实现这个概念，需要有四个原则;
; Openness: [[idea sharing|Sharing ideas]] and [[intellectual property]]: though these resources provide the edge over competitors more benefits accrue from allowing others to share ideas and gain significant improvement and scrutiny through collaboration.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Openness: Sharing ideas and intellectual property: though these resources provide the edge over competitors more benefits accrue from allowing others to share ideas and gain significant improvement and scrutiny through collaboration.
开放性: 分享想法和知识产权: 尽管这些资源提供了相对于竞争对手的优势，但允许其他人分享想法并通过合作获得重大改进和审查会带来更多好处。
; Peering: Horizontal organization as with the 'opening up' of the Linux program where users are free to modify and develop it provided that they make it available for others. Peering succeeds because it encourages [[self-organization]] – a style of production that works more effectively than hierarchical management for certain tasks.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Peering: Horizontal organization as with the 'opening up' of the Linux program where users are free to modify and develop it provided that they make it available for others. Peering succeeds because it encourages self-organization – a style of production that works more effectively than hierarchical management for certain tasks.
凝视: 与 Linux 程序的开放一样的横向组织，用户可以自由地修改和开发它，只要他们将它提供给其他人。成功的原因在于它鼓励自我组织---- 一种对某些任务比分层管理更有效的生产方式。
; [[Sharing]]: Companies have started to share some ideas while maintaining some degree of control over others, like potential and critical [[patent rights]]. Limiting all intellectual property shuts out opportunities, while sharing some expands markets and brings out products faster.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Sharing: Companies have started to share some ideas while maintaining some degree of control over others, like potential and critical patent rights. Limiting all intellectual property shuts out opportunities, while sharing some expands markets and brings out products faster.
分享: 公司已经开始分享一些想法，同时保持一定程度的控制权，比如潜在的和关键的专利权。限制所有的知识产权将机会拒之门外，而分享一些知识产权则会更快地扩大市场和推出产品。
; Acting Globally: The advancement in communication technology has prompted the rise of global companies at low overhead costs. The [[internet]] is widespread, therefore a globally integrated company has no geographical boundaries and may access new markets, ideas and technology.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008">Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2008). ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=DVomiOeBg_YC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything]'', USA: Penguin Group</ref>
Acting Globally: The advancement in communication technology has prompted the rise of global companies at low overhead costs. The internet is widespread, therefore a globally integrated company has no geographical boundaries and may access new markets, ideas and technology.
全球行动: 通信技术的进步促使全球公司以低廉的管理费用崛起。互联网是普遍的，因此一个全球性的综合性公司没有地理边界，可以进入新的市场，思想和技术。
== Collective intelligence factor ''c'' ==
[[File:Scree plot showing percent of explained variance for the first five factors in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies as well as the individual intelligence test for all participants (assessed with Wonderlic Personnel Test).png|thumb|[[Scree plot]] showing percent of explained variance for the first factors in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies.]]
[[Scree plot showing percent of explained variance for the first factors in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies.]]
[[在伍利等人的第一个因素的解释方差百分比的斯克里图显示。[2010年的两项原始研究]
A new scientific understanding of collective intelligence defines it as a group's general ability to perform a wide range of tasks.<ref name=":0" /> Definition, operationalization and statistical methods are similar to the [[G factor (psychometrics)|psychometric approach of general individual intelligence]]. Hereby, an individual's performance on a given set of cognitive tasks is used to measure general cognitive ability indicated by the general intelligence [[G factor (psychometrics)|factor ''g'']] extracted via [[factor analysis]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Spearman|first=Charles, E.|date=1904|title="General intelligence," objectively determined and measured|url=|journal=American Journal of Psychology |volume=15 |issue=2|pages=201–293|doi=10.2307/1412107|pmid=|jstor=1412107}}</ref> In the same vein as ''g'' serves to display between-individual performance differences on cognitive tasks, collective intelligence research aims to find a parallel intelligence factor for groups {{'}}''c'' factor'<ref name=":0" /> (also called 'collective intelligence factor' (''CI'')<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|author1=Engel, D. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Jing, L. X. |author4=Chabris, C. F. |author5= Malone, T. W. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2014|title=Reading the Mind in the Eyes or reading between the lines? Theory of Mind predicts collective intelligence equally well online and face-to-face|journal=PLOS One |volume=9 |issue=12 |pages=e115212|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0115212|pmid=25514387 |pmc=4267836|bibcode=2014PLoSO...9k5212E }}</ref>) displaying between-group differences on task performance. The collective intelligence score then is used to predict how this same group will perform on any other similar task in the future. Yet tasks, hereby, refer to mental or intellectual tasks performed by small groups<ref name=":0" /> even though the concept is hoped to be transferable to other performances and any groups or crowds reaching from families to companies and even whole cities.<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal|author1=Woolley, A. |author2= Malone, T. |last-author-amp=yes |date=June 2011|title=Defend your research: What makes a team smarter? More women|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51453001|journal=Harvard Business Review |volume=89 |issue=6 |pages=32–33|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> Since individuals' ''g'' factor scores are highly correlated with full-scale [[Intelligence quotient|IQ]] scores, which are in turn regarded as good estimates of ''g'',<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /> this measurement of collective intelligence can also be seen as an intelligence indicator or quotient respectively for a group (Group-IQ) parallel to an individual's intelligence quotient (IQ) even though the score is not a quotient per se.
A new scientific understanding of collective intelligence defines it as a group's general ability to perform a wide range of tasks. In the same vein as g serves to display between-individual performance differences on cognitive tasks, collective intelligence research aims to find a parallel intelligence factor for groups c factor') displaying between-group differences on task performance. The collective intelligence score then is used to predict how this same group will perform on any other similar task in the future. Yet tasks, hereby, refer to mental or intellectual tasks performed by small groups Since individuals' g factor scores are highly correlated with full-scale IQ scores, which are in turn regarded as good estimates of g, this measurement of collective intelligence can also be seen as an intelligence indicator or quotient respectively for a group (Group-IQ) parallel to an individual's intelligence quotient (IQ) even though the score is not a quotient per se.
对集体智慧的一种新的科学理解将它定义为一个群体执行广泛任务的一般能力。集体智力研究的目的在于找到一个平行的智力因素来表现群体间的任务绩效差异。然后集体智慧分数被用来预测同一组人在未来任何其他类似任务中的表现。由于个人的 g 因子得分与全面的 IQ 得分高度相关，而全面的 IQ 得分又被认为是对 g 的良好估计，因此这种集体智力的测量也可以分别被视为一个与个人的智商 / 智商(IQ)平行的群体(group-IQ)的智力指标或商，即使这个分数本身并不是商数。
Mathematically, ''c'' and ''g'' are both variables summarizing positive correlations among different tasks supposing that performance on one task is comparable with performance on other similar tasks.<ref name=":5">{{Cite book|title=A history of intelligence test interpretation. In D.P. Flanagan and P.L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (2nd Ed.)|author1=Kamphaus, R.W. |author2=Winsor, A.P. |author3=Rowe, E.W. |author4= Kim, S. |last-author-amp=yes |publisher=Guilford|year=2005|isbn=|location=New York, NY|pages=23–38}}</ref> ''c'' thus is a source of variance among groups and can only be considered as a group's standing on the ''c'' factor compared to other groups in a given relevant population.<ref name=":2" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last=van der Maas|first=Han L. J.|last2=Dolan|first2=Conor V.|last3=Grasman|first3=Raoul P. P. P.|last4=Wicherts|first4=Jelte M.|last5=Huizenga|first5=Hilde M.|last6=Raijmakers|first6=Maartje E. J.|date=2006-10-01|title=A dynamical model of general intelligence: the positive manifold of intelligence by mutualism|journal=Psychological Review|volume=113|issue=4|pages=842–861|doi=10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.842|pmid=17014305}}</ref> The concept is in contrast to competing hypotheses including other correlational structures to explain group intelligence,<ref name=":0" /> such as a composition out of several equally important but independent factors as found in [[Big Five personality traits|individual personality research]].<ref>{{Cite journal|author1=McCrae, R. R. |author2=Costa Jr., P. T.|date=1987|title=Validation of the Five-Factor Model of Personality Across Instruments and Observers|url=http://webs.wofford.edu/steinmetzkr/teaching/Psy150/Lecture%20PDFs/FiveFactorModel.pdf|journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |volume=52 |issue=1 |pages=81–90|doi=10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81|pmid=3820081|access-date=}}</ref>
Mathematically, c and g are both variables summarizing positive correlations among different tasks supposing that performance on one task is comparable with performance on other similar tasks. c thus is a source of variance among groups and can only be considered as a group's standing on the c factor compared to other groups in a given relevant population. The concept is in contrast to competing hypotheses including other correlational structures to explain group intelligence,
数学上，c 和 g 都是变量，总结了不同任务之间的正相关性，假设一项任务的表现与其他类似任务的表现是可比的。因此，c 是各群体之间差异的来源，只能被视为一个群体在 c 系数上与某一特定相关人口中的其他群体相比的地位。这个概念与包括其他相关结构在内的竞争性假设形成对比，以解释群体智力,
Besides, this scientific idea also aims to explore the causes affecting collective intelligence, such as group size, collaboration tools or group members' interpersonal skills.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web|url=http://cci.mit.edu/research_developing.html|title=MIT Center for Collective Intelligence|website=cci.mit.edu|access-date=2016-04-26|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160330091237/http://cci.mit.edu/research_developing.html|archive-date=30 March 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> The [[MIT Center for Collective Intelligence]], for instance, announced the detection of ''The Genome of Collective Intelligence''<ref name=":3" /> as one of its main goals aiming to develop a ''taxonomy of organizational building blocks, or genes, that can be combined and recombined to harness the intelligence of crowds''.<ref name=":3" />
Besides, this scientific idea also aims to explore the causes affecting collective intelligence, such as group size, collaboration tools or group members' interpersonal skills. The MIT Center for Collective Intelligence, for instance, announced the detection of The Genome of Collective Intelligence as one of its main goals aiming to develop a taxonomy of organizational building blocks, or genes, that can be combined and recombined to harness the intelligence of crowds.
此外，这一科学思想还旨在探索影响集体智慧的原因，如群体规模、协作工具或群体成员的人际交往技能。例如，麻省理工学院集体智慧中心宣布，探测集体智慧的基因组作为其主要目标之一，旨在发展组织构件或基因的分类，这些基因可以被组合和重组，以利用群体的智慧。
=== Causes ===
Individual intelligence is shown to be genetically and environmentally influenced.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Briley|first=Daniel A.|last2=Tucker-Drob|first2=Elliot M.|date=2014-09-01|title=Genetic and environmental continuity in personality development: a meta-analysis|journal=Psychological Bulletin|volume=140|issue=5|pages=1303–1331|doi=10.1037/a0037091|pmc=4152379|pmid=24956122}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Deary|first=Ian J.|last2=Spinath|first2=Frank M.|last3=Bates|first3=Timothy C.|date=2006-01-01|title=Genetics of intelligence|journal=European Journal of Human Genetics|volume=14|issue=6|pages=690–700|doi=10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201588|pmid=16721405|doi-access=free}}</ref> Analogously, collective intelligence research aims to explore reasons why certain groups perform more intelligent than other groups given that ''c'' is just moderately correlated with the intelligence of individual group members.<ref name=":0" /> According to Woolley et al.'s results, neither team cohesion nor motivation or satisfaction is correlated with ''c''. However, they claim that three factors were found as significant correlates: the variance in the number of speaking turns, group members' average social sensitivity and the proportion of females. All three had similar predictive power for ''c'', but only social sensitivity was statistically significant (b=0.33, P=0.05).<ref name=":0" />
Individual intelligence is shown to be genetically and environmentally influenced. Analogously, collective intelligence research aims to explore reasons why certain groups perform more intelligent than other groups given that c is just moderately correlated with the intelligence of individual group members. According to Woolley et al.'s results, neither team cohesion nor motivation or satisfaction is correlated with c. However, they claim that three factors were found as significant correlates: the variance in the number of speaking turns, group members' average social sensitivity and the proportion of females. All three had similar predictive power for c, but only social sensitivity was statistically significant (b=0.33, P=0.05).
个人的智力被证明受到遗传和环境的影响。类似地，集体智力研究的目的是探索为什么某些群体比其他群体表现得更聪明，因为 c 只是与个体群体成员的智力适度相关。根据伍利等人的研究。研究结果表明，团队凝聚力、团队动机和团队满意度与 c 均无相关性，但有三个因素显著相关: 说话次数的差异、团队成员的平均社会敏感度和女性比例。三者对 c 的预测能力相似，但只有社会敏感性具有统计学意义(b0.33，p0.05)。
The number speaking turns indicates that "groups where a few people dominated the conversation were less collectively intelligent than those with a more equal distribution of conversational turn-taking".<ref name=":4" /> Hence, providing multiple team members the chance to speak up made a group more intelligent.<ref name=":0" />
The number speaking turns indicates that "groups where a few people dominated the conversation were less collectively intelligent than those with a more equal distribution of conversational turn-taking". Hence, providing multiple team members the chance to speak up made a group more intelligent.
话轮转换的数字表明，“少数人主导谈话的群体，其总体智商要低于那些话轮转换分布更均衡的群体”。因此，为多个团队成员提供畅所欲言的机会会让一个团队变得更聪明。
Group members' social sensitivity was measured via the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal|vauthors=Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Hill J, Raste Y, Plumb I |date=2001|title=The ''Reading the Mind in the Eyes'' Test revised version: a study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism|url=|journal=Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry |volume=42 |issue=2|pages=241–251|doi=10.1017/s0021963001006643|pmid=}}</ref> (RME) and correlated .26 with ''c''.<ref name=":0" /> Hereby, participants are asked to detect thinking or feeling expressed in other peoples' eyes presented on pictures and assessed in a multiple choice format. The test aims to measure peoples' [[Theory of mind|theory of mind (ToM)]], also called 'mentalizing'<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Apperly|first=Ian A.|date=2012-05-01|title=What is "theory of mind"? Concepts, cognitive processes and individual differences|journal=The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology|volume=65|issue=5|pages=825–839|doi=10.1080/17470218.2012.676055|pmid=22533318}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Baron-Cohen | first1 = Simon | last2 = Leslie | first2 = Alan M. | last3 = Frith | first3 = Uta | title = Does the autistic child have a "theory of mind"? | journal = [[Cognition (journal)|Cognition]] | volume = 21 | issue = 1 | pages = 37–46 | doi = 10.1016/0010-0277(85)90022-8 | pmid = 2934210 | date = October 1985 | ref = harv }} [https://web.archive.org/web/20170928145836/http://ruccs.rutgers.edu/images/personal-alan-leslie/publications/Baron-Cohen%20Leslie%20%26%20Frith%201985.pdf Pdf.]</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Flavell|first=J. H.|date=1999-01-01|title=Cognitive development: children's knowledge about the mind|journal=Annual Review of Psychology|volume=50|pages=21–45|doi=10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.21|pmid=10074674}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Premack|first=David|last2=Woodruff|first2=Guy|date=1978-12-01|title=Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?|url=http://journals.cambridge.org/article_S0140525X00076512|journal=Behavioral and Brain Sciences|volume=1|issue=4|pages=515–526|doi=10.1017/S0140525X00076512|doi-access=free}}</ref> or 'mind reading',<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Heyes|first=Cecilia M.|last2=Frith|first2=Chris D.|date=2014-06-20|title=The cultural evolution of mind reading|journal=Science|volume=344|issue=6190|pages=1243091|doi=10.1126/science.1243091|pmid=24948740}}</ref> which refers to the ability to attribute mental states, such as beliefs, desires or intents, to other people and in how far people understand that others have beliefs, desires, intentions or perspectives different from their own ones.<ref name=":6" /> RME is a ToM test for adults<ref name=":6" /> that shows sufficient test-retest reliability<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hallerbäck|first=Maria Unenge|last2=Lugnegård|first2=Tove|last3=Hjärthag|first3=Fredrik|last4=Gillberg|first4=Christopher|date=2009-03-01|title=The Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test: Test–retest reliability of a Swedish version|journal=Cognitive Neuropsychiatry|volume=14|issue=2|pages=127–143|doi=10.1080/13546800902901518|pmid=19370436}}</ref> and constantly differentiates control groups from individuals with functional [[autism]] or [[Asperger syndrome|Asperger Syndrome]].<ref name=":6" /> It is one of the most widely accepted and well-validated tests for ToM within adults.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Pinkham|first=Amy E.|last2=Penn|first2=David L.|last3=Green|first3=Michael F.|last4=Buck|first4=Benjamin|last5=Healey|first5=Kristin|last6=Harvey|first6=Philip D.|date=2014-07-01|title=The Social Cognition Psychometric Evaluation Study: Results of the Expert Survey and RAND Panel|url=http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/4/813|journal=Schizophrenia Bulletin|volume=40|issue=4|pages=813–823|doi=10.1093/schbul/sbt081|pmc=4059426|pmid=23728248}}</ref> ToM can be regarded as an associated subset of skills and abilities within the broader concept of [[emotional intelligence]].<ref name=":4" /><ref name="Yip 48–55">{{Cite journal|last=Yip|first=Jeremy A.|last2=Côté|first2=Stéphane|date=2013-01-01|title=The Emotionally Intelligent Decision Maker Emotion-Understanding Ability Reduces the Effect of Incidental Anxiety on Risk Taking|journal=Psychological Science|volume=24|issue=1|pages=48–55|doi=10.1177/0956797612450031|pmid=23221020}}</ref>
Group members' social sensitivity was measured via the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RME) and correlated .26 with c. or 'mind reading', which refers to the ability to attribute mental states, such as beliefs, desires or intents, to other people and in how far people understand that others have beliefs, desires, intentions or perspectives different from their own ones. and constantly differentiates control groups from individuals with functional autism or Asperger Syndrome. ToM can be regarded as an associated subset of skills and abilities within the broader concept of emotional intelligence.
团队成员的社会敏感度是通过阅读心灵的眼睛测试(RME)测量和相关。26与 c 或“心灵阅读” ，这是指能够将心理状态，如信念，欲望或意图，归因于其他人，以及人们在多大程度上理解他人的信念，欲望，意图或观点与自己的不同。并不断地将对照组与功能性自闭症或阿斯伯格综合征患者区分开来。心理理论可以被看作是情商这一更广泛概念中的一个相关的技能和能力子集。
The proportion of females as a predictor of ''c'' was '''largely mediated by social sensitivity ([[Sobel test|Sobel]] z = 1.93, P= 0.03)'''<ref name=":0" /> which is in vein with previous research showing that women score higher on social sensitivity tests.<ref name=":6" /> While a [[Mediation (statistics)|mediation]], statistically speaking, clarifies the mechanism underlying the relationship between a dependent and an independent variable,<ref>{{Cite book|title=Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis|last=MacKinnon, D. P.|publisher=Erlbaum|year=2008|isbn=|location=New York, NY|pages=}}</ref> Wolley agreed in an interview with the ''[[Harvard Business Review]]'' that these findings are '''saying that groups of women are smarter than groups of men'''.<ref name=":7" /> However, she relativizes this stating that the actual important thing is the high social sensitivity of group members.<ref name=":7" />
The proportion of females as a predictor of c was largely mediated by social sensitivity (Sobel z = 1.93, P= 0.03) Wolley agreed in an interview with the Harvard Business Review that these findings are saying that groups of women are smarter than groups of men. However, she relativizes this stating that the actual important thing is the high social sensitivity of group members.
在《哈佛商业评论》的一次采访中，沃利同意这一观点: 这些研究结果表明，女性群体比男性群体更聪明。然而，她相对地说，真正重要的是团队成员的高度社会敏感性。
It is theorized that the collective intelligence factor ''c'' is an emergent property resulting from bottom-up as well as top-down processes.<ref name=":11">{{Cite journal|last=Woolley|first=Anita Williams|last2=Aggarwal|first2=Ishani|last3=Malone|first3=Thomas W.|date=2015-12-01|title=Collective Intelligence and Group Performance|journal=Current Directions in Psychological Science|volume=24|issue=6|pages=420–424|doi=10.1177/0963721415599543}}</ref> Hereby, bottom-up processes cover aggregated group-member characteristics. Top-down processes cover group structures and norms that influence a group's way of collaborating and coordinating.<ref name=":11" />
It is theorized that the collective intelligence factor c is an emergent property resulting from bottom-up as well as top-down processes. Hereby, bottom-up processes cover aggregated group-member characteristics. Top-down processes cover group structures and norms that influence a group's way of collaborating and coordinating.
集体智力因素 c 是自下而上和自上而下过程共同作用的产物。据此，自底向上的过程涵盖了聚集的群成员特征。自上而下的过程包括影响团队合作和协调方式的团队结构和规范。
=== Processes ===
[[File:Causes for c.png|thumb|Predictors for the collective intelligence factor ''c''. Suggested by Woolley, Aggarwal & Malone<ref name=":11"/> (2015)]]
Predictors for the collective intelligence factor c. Suggested by Woolley, Aggarwal & Malone (2015)
集体智慧因子 c 的预测因子，由 Woolley，Aggarwal & Malone (2015)提出
==== Top-down processes ====
Top-down processes cover group interaction, such as structures, processes, and norms.<ref name="Woolley 420–424">{{Cite journal|last=Woolley|first=A. W.|last2=Aggarwal|first2=I.|last3=Malone|first3=T. W.|date=2015-12-01|title=Collective Intelligence and Group Performance|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286512331|journal=Current Directions in Psychological Science|volume=24|issue=6|pages=420–424|doi=10.1177/0963721415599543}}</ref> An example of such top-down processes is conversational turn-taking.<ref name=":0" /> Research further suggest that collectively intelligent groups communicate more in general as well as more equally; same applies for participation and is shown for face-to-face as well as online groups communicating only via writing.<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":9" />
Top-down processes cover group interaction, such as structures, processes, and norms. An example of such top-down processes is conversational turn-taking. Research further suggest that collectively intelligent groups communicate more in general as well as more equally; same applies for participation and is shown for face-to-face as well as online groups communicating only via writing.
自顶向下的过程包括组交互，如结构、过程和规范。这种自顶向下流程的一个例子是会话转换。研究进一步表明，集体智慧群体的沟通更加普遍，也更加平等; 参与也是如此，表现在面对面的交流以及仅通过书面交流的在线群体上。
==== Bottom-up processes ====
Bottom-up processes include group composition,<ref name="Woolley 420–424"/> namely the characteristics of group members which are aggregated to the team level.<ref name=":11" /> An example of such bottom-up processes is the average social sensitivity or the average and maximum intelligence scores of group members.<ref name=":0" /> Furthermore, collective intelligence was found to be related to a group's cognitive diversity<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal|author1=Aggarwal, I. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Chabris, C. F. |author4= Malone, T. W. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2015|title=Cognitive diversity, collective intelligence, and learning in teams.|url=|journal=Paper Presented at the 2015 Collective Intelligence Conference, Santa Clara, CA.|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> including thinking styles and perspectives.<ref>{{Cite journal|author1=Kozhevnikov, M. |author2=Evans, C. |author3= Kosslyn, S. M. |last-author-amp=yes|date=2014|title=Cognitive style as environmentally sensitive individual differences in cognition: A modern synthesis and applications in education, business, and management|url=|journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest |volume=15 |issue=1 |pages=3–33|doi=10.1177/1529100614525555|pmid=26171827}}</ref> Groups that are moderately diverse in [[cognitive style]] have higher collective intelligence than those who are very similar in cognitive style or very different. Consequently, groups where members are too similar to each other lack the variety of perspectives and skills needed to perform well. On the other hand, groups whose members are too different seem to have difficulties to communicate and coordinate effectively.<ref name=":12" />
Bottom-up processes include group composition, including thinking styles and perspectives. Groups that are moderately diverse in cognitive style have higher collective intelligence than those who are very similar in cognitive style or very different. Consequently, groups where members are too similar to each other lack the variety of perspectives and skills needed to perform well. On the other hand, groups whose members are too different seem to have difficulties to communicate and coordinate effectively.
自下而上的过程包括群体构成，包括思维风格和观点。认知方式适度多样化的群体比认知方式非常相似或非常不同的群体有更高的集体智慧。因此，成员太相似的群体缺乏表现良好所需的各种观点和技能。另一方面，成员差异太大的群体似乎难以有效地沟通和协调。
==== Serial vs Parallel processes ====
For most of human history, collective intelligence was confined to small tribal groups in which opinions were aggregated through real-time parallel interactions among members.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Moral tribes : emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them|last=1974–|first=Greene, Joshua David|isbn=978-0143126058|oclc=871336785|date=2014-12-30|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/moraltribesemoti0000gree}}</ref> In modern times, mass communication, mass media, and networking technologies have enabled collective intelligence to span massive groups, distributed across continents and time-zones. To accommodate this shift in scale, collective intelligence in large-scale groups been dominated by serialized polling processes such as aggregating up-votes, likes, and ratings over time. While modern systems benefit from larger group size, the serialized process has been found to introduce substantial noise that distorts the collective output of the group. In one significant study of serialized collective intelligence, it was found that the first vote contributed to a serialized voting system can distort the final result by 34%.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Muchnik|first=Lev|last2=Aral|first2=Sinan|last3=Taylor|first3=Sean J.|date=2013-08-09|title=Social Influence Bias: A Randomized Experiment|journal=Science|volume=341|issue=6146|pages=647–651|doi=10.1126/science.1240466|issn=0036-8075|pmid=23929980|bibcode=2013Sci...341..647M}}</ref>
For most of human history, collective intelligence was confined to small tribal groups in which opinions were aggregated through real-time parallel interactions among members. In modern times, mass communication, mass media, and networking technologies have enabled collective intelligence to span massive groups, distributed across continents and time-zones. To accommodate this shift in scale, collective intelligence in large-scale groups been dominated by serialized polling processes such as aggregating up-votes, likes, and ratings over time. While modern systems benefit from larger group size, the serialized process has been found to introduce substantial noise that distorts the collective output of the group. In one significant study of serialized collective intelligence, it was found that the first vote contributed to a serialized voting system can distort the final result by 34%.
在人类历史的大部分时间里，集体智慧仅限于小部落群体，在这些群体中，各种意见通过成员之间的实时并行互动得到汇总。在现代，大众传播、大众媒体和网络技术使得集体智慧能够跨越大规模的群体，分布在各大洲和各个时区。为了适应这种规模上的转变，大规模群体中的集体智慧被一系列投票过程所主导，比如随着时间的推移聚合最高票数、喜欢和评分。虽然现代系统受益于更大的群体规模，已经发现序列化的过程引入了大量的噪音，扭曲了群体的集体产出。在一项关于系列化集体智慧的重要研究中，发现系列化投票系统中的第一次投票可以使最终结果失真34% 。
To address the problems of serialized aggregation of input among large-scale groups, recent advancements collective intelligence have worked to replace serialized votes, polls, and markets, with parallel systems such as "[[Swarm intelligence|human swarms]]" modeled after synchronous swarms in nature.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20161215-why-bees-could-be-the-secret-to-superhuman-intelligence|title=Why bees could be the secret to superhuman intelligence|last=Oxenham|first=Simon|access-date=2017-05-23}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Rosenberg|first=L.|last2=Baltaxe|first2=D.|last3=Pescetelli|first3=N.|date=2016-10-01|title=Crowds vs swarms, a comparison of intelligence|journal=2016 Swarm/Human Blended Intelligence Workshop (SHBI)|pages=1–4|doi=10.1109/SHBI.2016.7780278|isbn=978-1-5090-3502-1}}</ref> Based on natural process of [[Swarm Intelligence]], these artificial swarms of networked humans enable participants to work together in parallel to answer questions and make predictions as an emergent collective intelligence.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Metcalf|first=Lynn|last2=Askay|first2=David A.|last3=Rosenberg|first3=Louis B.|date=2019|title=Keeping Humans in the Loop: Pooling Knowledge through Artificial Swarm Intelligence to Improve Business Decision Making|journal=California Management Review|language=en|volume=61|issue=4|pages=84–109|doi=10.1177/0008125619862256|issn=0008-1256}}</ref> In one high-profile example, a human swarm challenge by CBS Interactive to predict the Kentucky Derby. The swarm correctly predicted the first four horses, in order, defying 542–1 odds and turning a $20 bet into $10,800.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.newsweek.com/artificial-intelligence-turns-20-11000-kentucky-derby-bet-457783|title=Artificial intelligence turns $20 into $11,000 in Kentucky Derby bet|date=2016-05-10|work=Newsweek|access-date=2017-05-23}}</ref>
To address the problems of serialized aggregation of input among large-scale groups, recent advancements collective intelligence have worked to replace serialized votes, polls, and markets, with parallel systems such as "human swarms" modeled after synchronous swarms in nature. Based on natural process of Swarm Intelligence, these artificial swarms of networked humans enable participants to work together in parallel to answer questions and make predictions as an emergent collective intelligence. In one high-profile example, a human swarm challenge by CBS Interactive to predict the Kentucky Derby. The swarm correctly predicted the first four horses, in order, defying 542–1 odds and turning a $20 bet into $10,800.
为了解决大规模群体之间连续集合输入的问题，最近的进展集体智慧致力于用类似“人类群体”的并行系统取代连续投票、投票和市场，这些系统是仿照自然界的同步群体建立的。基于群体智能的自然过程，这些网络化的人类群使得参与者能够并行工作回答问题，并作为一个新兴的集体智慧进行预测。在一个引人注目的例子中，哥伦比亚广播公司互动公司(CBS Interactive)发起了一场群体挑战赛，来预测肯塔基赛马会。蜂群正确地预测了前四匹马，排序，排除了542-1的赔率，把20美元的赌注变成了10800美元。
The value of parallel collective intelligence was demonstrated in medical applications by researchers at [[Stanford University School of Medicine]] and [[Unanimous A.I.|Unanimous AI]] in a set of published studies wherein groups of human doctors were connected by real-time swarming algorithms and tasked with diagnosing chest x-rays for the presence of pneumonia.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-human-os/biomedical/diagnostics/ai-human-hive-mind-diagnoses-pneumonia|title=AI-Human "Hive Mind" Diagnoses Pneumonia|last=Scudellari|first=Megan|date=2018-09-13|website=IEEE Spectrum: Technology, Engineering, and Science News|access-date=2019-07-20}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.stanforddaily.com/2018/09/27/artificial-swarm-intelligence-diagnoses-pneumonia-better-than-individual-computer-or-doctor/|title=Artificial swarm intelligence diagnoses pneumonia better than individual computer or doctor|last=Liu|first=Fan|date=2018-09-27|website=The Stanford Daily|access-date=2019-07-20}}</ref> When working together as "human swarms," the groups of experienced radiologists demonstrated a 33% reduction in diagnostic errors as compared to traditional methods.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.radiologytoday.net/archive/rt0119p12.shtml|title=A Swarm of Insight - Radiology Today Magazine|website=www.radiologytoday.net|access-date=2019-07-20}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rosenberg|first=Louis|last2=Lungren|first2=Matthew|last3=Halabi|first3=Safwan|last4=Willcox|first4=Gregg|last5=Baltaxe|first5=David|last6=Lyons|first6=Mimi|date=November 2018|title=Artificial Swarm Intelligence employed to Amplify Diagnostic Accuracy in Radiology|journal=2018 IEEE 9th Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (IEMCON)|location=Vancouver, BC|publisher=IEEE|pages=1186–1191|doi=10.1109/IEMCON.2018.8614883|isbn=9781538672662}}</ref>
The value of parallel collective intelligence was demonstrated in medical applications by researchers at Stanford University School of Medicine and Unanimous AI in a set of published studies wherein groups of human doctors were connected by real-time swarming algorithms and tasked with diagnosing chest x-rays for the presence of pneumonia. When working together as "human swarms," the groups of experienced radiologists demonstrated a 33% reduction in diagnostic errors as compared to traditional methods.
斯坦福大学医学院(Stanford University School of Medicine)的研究人员和人工智能领域的研究人员在一系列已发表的研究中证明了平行集体智能的价值，在这些研究中，一群群的人类医生通过实时的群集算法相互联系，并负责诊断肺炎的胸部 x 光片。当作为“人群”一起工作时，这些经验丰富的放射学家小组证明，与传统方法相比，诊断错误减少了33% 。
=== Evidence ===
[[File:Standardized Regression Coefficients.png|alt=Standardized Regression Coefficients for the collective intelligence factor ''c'' and group member intelligence regressed on the two criterion tasks as found in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies.|thumb|Standardized Regression Coefficients for the collective intelligence factor ''c'' as found in Woolley et al.'s<ref name=":0"/> (2010) two original studies. ''c'' and average (maximum) member intelligence scores are regressed on the criterion tasks.]]
Standardized Regression Coefficients for the collective intelligence factor c as found in Woolley et al.'s (2010) two original studies. c and average (maximum) member intelligence scores are regressed on the criterion tasks.
集体智力因子 c 的标准化回归系数在伍利等人发现。的(2010)两个原始研究。C 和平均(最大)成员智力得分回归于标准任务。
Woolley, Chabris, Pentland, Hashmi, & Malone (2010),<ref name=":0" /> the originators of this scientific understanding of collective intelligence, found a single statistical factor for collective intelligence in their research across 192 groups with people randomly recruited from the public. In Woolley et al.'s two initial studies, groups worked together on different tasks from the [[The Circumplex Model of Group Tasks|McGrath Task Circumplex]],<ref>{{Cite book|title=Groups: Interaction and Performance|last=McGrath, J. E.|publisher=Prentice-Hall|year=1984|isbn=|location=Englewood Cliffs, NJ|pages=}}</ref> a well-established taxonomy of group tasks. Tasks were chosen from all four quadrants of the circumplex and included visual puzzles, brainstorming, making collective moral judgments, and negotiating over limited resources. The results in these tasks were taken to conduct a [[factor analysis]]. Both studies showed support for a general collective intelligence factor ''c'' underlying differences in group performance with an initial eigenvalue accounting for 43% (44% in study 2) of the variance, whereas the next factor accounted for only 18% (20%). That fits the range normally found in research regarding a [[G factor (psychometrics)|general individual intelligence factor ''g'']] typically accounting for 40% to 50% percent of between-individual performance differences on cognitive tests.<ref name=":5" />
Woolley, Chabris, Pentland, Hashmi, & Malone (2010), a well-established taxonomy of group tasks. Tasks were chosen from all four quadrants of the circumplex and included visual puzzles, brainstorming, making collective moral judgments, and negotiating over limited resources. The results in these tasks were taken to conduct a factor analysis. Both studies showed support for a general collective intelligence factor c underlying differences in group performance with an initial eigenvalue accounting for 43% (44% in study 2) of the variance, whereas the next factor accounted for only 18% (20%). That fits the range normally found in research regarding a general individual intelligence factor g typically accounting for 40% to 50% percent of between-individual performance differences on cognitive tests.
Woolley，Chabris，彭特兰，Hashmi，& Malone (2010) ，一个完善的分类组任务。任务从复杂的四个象限中选择，包括视觉谜题、头脑风暴、做出集体道德判断以及在有限的资源上进行谈判。对这些任务的结果进行因子分析。两项研究都表明支持一般集体智力因素 c，在群体绩效的潜在差异中，最初的特征值占方差的43% (研究2中为44%) ，而下一个因素只占18% (20%)。这符合研究中通常发现的范围，一般个人智力因素 g 通常占认知测试中个人表现差异的40% 至50% 。
Afterwards, a more complex criterion task was absolved by each group measuring whether the extracted ''c'' factor had predictive power for performance outside the original task batteries. Criterion tasks were playing [[Draughts|checkers (draughts)]] against a standardized computer in the first and a complex architectural design task in the second study. In a [[regression analysis]] using both individual intelligence of group members and ''c'' to predict performance on the criterion tasks, ''c'' had a significant effect, but average and maximum individual intelligence had not. While average (r=0.15, P=0.04) and maximum intelligence (r=0.19, P=0.008) of individual group members were moderately correlated with ''c'', ''c'' was still a much better predictor of the criterion tasks. According to Woolley et al., this supports the existence of a collective intelligence factor ''c,'' because it demonstrates an effect over and beyond group members' individual intelligence and thus that ''c'' is more than just the aggregation of the individual IQs or the influence of the group member with the highest IQ.<ref name=":0" />
Afterwards, a more complex criterion task was absolved by each group measuring whether the extracted c factor had predictive power for performance outside the original task batteries. Criterion tasks were playing checkers (draughts) against a standardized computer in the first and a complex architectural design task in the second study. In a regression analysis using both individual intelligence of group members and c to predict performance on the criterion tasks, c had a significant effect, but average and maximum individual intelligence had not. While average (r=0.15, P=0.04) and maximum intelligence (r=0.19, P=0.008) of individual group members were moderately correlated with c, c was still a much better predictor of the criterion tasks. According to Woolley et al., this supports the existence of a collective intelligence factor c, because it demonstrates an effect over and beyond group members' individual intelligence and thus that c is more than just the aggregation of the individual IQs or the influence of the group member with the highest IQ.
然后，一个更复杂的标准任务被免除，每组测量提取的 c 因子是否对原任务电池之外的性能有预测能力。标准任务是下棋(跳棋)对标准计算机在第一个和复杂的建筑设计任务在第二个研究。在同时使用小组成员的个人智力和 c 来预测标准任务的表现的回归分析中，c 有显著的效果，但是平均和最大的个人智力没有。各组成员的平均智力(r0.15，p0.04)和最高智力(r0.19，p0.008)与 c 有中度相关，但 c 仍是标准任务的较好预测因子。根据 Woolley 等人的研究，这支持了集体智力因素 c 的存在，因为它证明了一种超越团队成员个人智力的影响，因此 c 不仅仅是个人智商的集合或者智商最高的团队成员的影响。
Engel et al.<ref name=":4" /> (2014) replicated Woolley et al.'s findings applying an accelerated battery of tasks with a first factor in the factor analysis explaining 49% of the between-group variance in performance with the following factors explaining less than half of this amount. Moreover, they found a similar result for groups working together online communicating only via text and confirmed the role of female proportion and social sensitivity in causing collective intelligence in both cases. Similarly to Wolley et al.,<ref name=":0" /> they also measured social sensitivity with the RME which is actually meant to measure people's ability to detect mental states in other peoples' eyes. The online collaborating participants, however, did neither know nor see each other at all. The authors conclude that scores on the RME must be related to a broader set of abilities of social reasoning than only drawing inferences from other people's eye expressions.<ref name=":13">{{Cite book|last=Engel|first=David|last2=Woolley|first2=Anita Williams|last3=Aggarwal|first3=Ishani|last4=Chabris|first4=Christopher F.|last5=Takahashi|first5=Masamichi|last6=Nemoto|first6=Keiichi|last7=Kaiser|first7=Carolin|last8=Kim|first8=Young Ji|last9=Malone|first9=Thomas W.|date=2015-01-01|title=Collective Intelligence in Computer-Mediated Collaboration Emerges in Different Contexts and Cultures|journal=Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems|series=CHI '15|location=New York, NY, USA|publisher=ACM|pages=3769–3778|doi=10.1145/2702123.2702259|isbn=9781450331456}}</ref>
Engel et al.
Engel et al.
A collective intelligence factor ''c'' in the sense of Woolley et al.<ref name=":0" /> was further found in groups of MBA students working together over the course of a semester,<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal|author1=Aggarwal, I. |author2= Woolley, A.W. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2014|title=The effects of cognitive diversity on collective intelligence and team learning.|url=|journal=Symposium Presented at the 50th Meeting of the Society of Experimental Social Psychology, Columbus, OH.|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> in online gaming groups<ref name=":9">{{Cite journal|author1=Kim, Y. J. |author2=Engel, D. |author3=Woolley, A. W. |author4=Lin, J. |author5=McArthur, N. |author6= Malone, T. W. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2015|title=Work together, play smart: Collective intelligence in League of Legends teams|url=|journal=Paper Presented at the 2015 Collective Intelligence Conference, Santa Clara, CA.|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> as well as in groups from different cultures<ref name=":10">{{Cite journal|author1=Engel, D. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Aggarwal, I. |author4=Chabris, C. F. |author5=Takahashi, M. |author6=Nemoto, K. |author7=Malone, T. W. |date=2015|title=Collective intelligence in computer-mediates collaboration emerges in different contexts and cultures.|url=https://dl.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=2702259&type=pdf|journal=In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15) (Pp. 3769–3778). New York, NY: ACM|doi=|pmid=}}</ref> and groups in different contexts in terms of short-term versus long-term groups.<ref name=":10" /> None of these investigations considered team members' individual intelligence scores as control variables.<ref name=":9" /><ref name=":8" /><ref name=":10" />
A collective intelligence factor c in the sense of Woolley et al. in online gaming groups as well as in groups from different cultures and groups in different contexts in terms of short-term versus long-term groups. None of these investigations considered team members' individual intelligence scores as control variables.
一个集体智慧因素 c 的意义，伍利等人。以及来自不同文化和群体的不同背景下的短期群体和长期群体。这些调查都没有将团队成员的个人智力分数作为控制变量。
Note as well that the field of collective intelligence research is quite young and published empirical evidence is relatively rare yet. However, various proposals and working papers are in progress or already completed but (supposedly) still in a [[scholarly peer review]]ing publication process.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sites.google.com/a/stern.nyu.edu/collective-intelligence-conference/|title=Collective Intelligence 2016|website=sites.google.com|access-date=2016-04-27}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/collectiveintelligence/posters/|title=Posters {{!}} Collective Intelligence 2015|website=sites.lsa.umich.edu|access-date=2016-04-27}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://collective.mech.northwestern.edu/?page_id=217|title=Proceedings {{!}} Collective Intelligence 2014|website=collective.mech.northwestern.edu|access-date=2016-04-27}}</ref><ref>{{Cite arxiv|eprint=1204.2991|last1= Malone|first1= Thomas W.|title= Collective Intelligence 2012: Proceedings|author2= Luis von Ahn|class= cs.SI|year= 2012}}</ref>
Note as well that the field of collective intelligence research is quite young and published empirical evidence is relatively rare yet. However, various proposals and working papers are in progress or already completed but (supposedly) still in a scholarly peer reviewing publication process.
还要注意的是，集体智慧研究领域相当年轻，而且在21经验证明发表的论文相对较少。然而，各种建议和工作文件正在进行中或已经完成，但(据推测)仍在学术同行评审出版过程中。
=== Predictive validity ===
Next to predicting a group's performance on more complex criterion tasks as shown in the original experiments,<ref name=":0" /> the collective intelligence factor ''c'' was also found to predict group performance in diverse tasks in MBA classes lasting over several months.<ref name=":8" /> Thereby, highly collectively intelligent groups earned significantly higher scores on their group assignments although their members did not do any better on other individually performed assignments. Moreover, highly collective intelligent teams improved performance over time suggesting that more collectively intelligent teams learn better.<ref name=":8" /> This is another potential parallel to individual intelligence where more intelligent people are found to acquire new material quicker.<ref name=":2" /><ref>{{Cite journal|author1=Schmidt, F.L. |author2= Hunter, J.E. |last-author-amp=yes |date=1998|title=The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings|url=|journal=Psychological Bulletin |volume=124 |issue= 2 |pages=262–274|doi=10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262|pmid=|citeseerx= 10.1.1.172.1733 }}</ref>
Next to predicting a group's performance on more complex criterion tasks as shown in the original experiments,
除了预测一组人在更复杂的标准任务上的表现，如原始实验所示,
Individual intelligence can be used to predict plenty of life outcomes from school attainment<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Nathan, B.|date=1997|title=Intelligence, Schooling, and Society|url=|journal=American Psychologist |volume=52 |issue=10 |pages=1046–1050|doi=10.1037/0003-066x.52.10.1046}}</ref> and career success<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Strenze|first=Tarmo|date=2007-09-01|title=Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal research|journal=Intelligence|volume=35|issue=5|pages=401–426|doi=10.1016/j.intell.2006.09.004}}</ref> to health outcomes<ref name=":14">{{Cite journal|author1=Deary, I.J. |author2=Weiss, A. |author3= Batty, D.G. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2010|title=Intelligence and Personality as Predictors of Illness and Death. How Researchers in Differential Psychology and Chronic Disease Epidemiology Are Collaborating to Understand and Address Health Inequalities|journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest |volume=11 |issue=2 |pages= 53–79|doi=10.1177/1529100610387081|pmid=26168413|hdl=20.500.11820/134d66d9-98db-447a-a8b2-5b019b96a7bb |url=https://www.pure.ed.ac.uk/ws/files/8895401/intelligence_and_personality_as_predictors.pdf }}</ref> and even mortality.<ref name=":14" /> Whether collective intelligence is able to predict other outcomes besides group performance on mental tasks has still to be investigated.
Individual intelligence can be used to predict plenty of life outcomes from school attainment and career success to health outcomes and even mortality. Whether collective intelligence is able to predict other outcomes besides group performance on mental tasks has still to be investigated.
个人智力可以用来预测大量的生活结果，从学业成就、事业成功到健康结果，甚至死亡率。集体智力是否能够预测智力任务群体表现以外的其他结果还有待研究。
=== Potential connections to individual intelligence ===
Gladwell<ref>{{Cite book|title=Outliers. The Story of Success|last=Gladwell, M.|publisher=Little, Brown and Company|year=2008|isbn=978-0-316-01792-3|location=New York, NY|pages=|url=https://archive.org/details/outliersstoryofs00glad}}</ref> (2008) showed that the relationship between individual IQ and success works only to a certain point and that additional IQ points over an estimate of IQ 120 do not translate into real life advantages. If a similar border exists for Group-IQ or if advantages are linear and infinite, has still to be explored. Similarly, demand for further research on possible connections of individual and collective intelligence exists within plenty of other potentially transferable logics of individual intelligence, such as, for instance, the development over time<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hedden|first=Trey|last2=Gabrieli|first2=John D. E.|date=2004-02-01|title=Insights into the ageing mind: a view from cognitive neuroscience|journal=Nature Reviews. Neuroscience|volume=5|issue=2|pages=87–96|doi=10.1038/nrn1323|pmid=14735112}}</ref> or the question of improving intelligence.<ref name=":15">{{Cite journal|last=Shipstead|first=Zach|last2=Redick|first2=Thomas S|last3=Engle|first3=Randall W.|date=2010-10-01|title=Does working memory training generalize?|journal=Psychologica Belgica|volume=50|issue=3–4|doi=10.5334/pb-50-3-4-245|pages=245|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":16">{{Cite journal|author1=Buschkuehl, M. |author2=Jaeggi, S.M.|date=2010|title=Improving intelligence a literature review|url=|journal=Swiss Medical Weekly |volume=140 |issue=19 |pages=266–72|doi=|pmid=20349365}}</ref> Whereas it is controversial whether human intelligence can be enhanced via training,<ref name=":15" /><ref name=":16" /> a group's collective intelligence potentially offers simpler opportunities for improvement by exchanging team members or implementing structures and technologies.<ref name=":7" /> Moreover, social sensitivity was found to be, at least temporarily, improvable by reading [[literary fiction]]<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kidd|first=David Comer|last2=Castano|first2=Emanuele|date=2013-10-18|title=Reading Literary Fiction Improves Theory of Mind|journal=Science|volume=342|issue=6156|pages=377–380|doi=10.1126/science.1239918|pmid=24091705|bibcode=2013Sci...342..377K}}</ref> as well as watching drama movies.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Black|first=Jessica|last2=Barnes|first2=Jennifer L.|title=Fiction and social cognition: The effect of viewing award-winning television dramas on theory of mind|journal=Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts|volume=9|issue=4|pages=423–429|doi=10.1037/aca0000031|year=2015}}</ref> In how far such training ultimately improves collective intelligence through social sensitivity remains an open question.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Handbook of Collective Intelligence|author1=Malone, T. W. |author2= Bernstein, M.S. |last-author-amp=yes |publisher=MIT Press|year=2015|isbn=|location=Cambridge, MA|pages=}}</ref>
Gladwell (2008) showed that the relationship between individual IQ and success works only to a certain point and that additional IQ points over an estimate of IQ 120 do not translate into real life advantages. If a similar border exists for Group-IQ or if advantages are linear and infinite, has still to be explored. Similarly, demand for further research on possible connections of individual and collective intelligence exists within plenty of other potentially transferable logics of individual intelligence, such as, for instance, the development over time or the question of improving intelligence. Whereas it is controversial whether human intelligence can be enhanced via training, as well as watching drama movies. In how far such training ultimately improves collective intelligence through social sensitivity remains an open question.
格拉德威尔(2008)指出，个人智商和成功之间的关系只在一定程度上起作用，超过估计智商120的额外智商点不会转化为现实生活中的优势。如果类似的边界存在的群体智商或如果优势是线性和无限的，仍然有待探索。类似地，对于个体和集体智慧之间可能存在的联系的进一步研究的需求存在于大量其他个体智慧的潜在可转移逻辑中，例如，随着时间的推移的发展或者提高智力的问题。然而，是否可以通过训练和观看戏剧电影来提高人类的智力却是一个有争议的问题。在多大程度上这种培训最终通过社会敏感性提高集体智慧仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。
There are further more advanced concepts and factor models attempting to explain individual cognitive ability including the categorization of intelligence in [[fluid and crystallized intelligence]]<ref>{{Cite book|title=Models of intelligence. In R.L. Linn (Ed.), Intelligence: Measurement, theory, and public policy (pp. 29–73).|last=Horn, J.|publisher=University of Illinois Press.|year=1989|isbn=|location=Urbana, IL|pages=}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action.|last=Cattell, R. B.|publisher=New York, NY|year=1971|isbn=|location=Houghton Mifflin|pages=}}</ref> or the [[Three-stratum theory|hierarchical model of intelligence differences]].<ref>{{Cite book|title=Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies.|last=Carroll, J.B.|publisher=Cambridge University Press.|year=1993|isbn=9780521387125|location=Cambridge, England|pages=|url=https://books.google.com/?id=jp9dt4_0_cIC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Johnson|first=Wendy|last2=Bouchard Jr.|first2=Thomas J.|date=2005-07-01|title=The structure of human intelligence: It is verbal, perceptual, and image rotation (VPR), not fluid and crystallized|journal=Intelligence|volume=33|issue=4|pages=393–416|doi=10.1016/j.intell.2004.12.002}}</ref> Further supplementing explanations and conceptualizations for the factor structure of the '''Genomes''' of collective intelligence besides a general {{'}}''c'' factor', though, are missing yet.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://cci.mit.edu/research_developing.html|title=MIT Center for Collective Intelligence|website=cci.mit.edu|access-date=2016-04-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160330091237/http://cci.mit.edu/research_developing.html|archive-date=30 March 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref>
There are further more advanced concepts and factor models attempting to explain individual cognitive ability including the categorization of intelligence in fluid and crystallized intelligence or the hierarchical model of intelligence differences. Further supplementing explanations and conceptualizations for the factor structure of the Genomes of collective intelligence besides a general c factor', though, are missing yet.
还有更进一步的更先进的概念和因素模型试图解释个体的认知能力，包括晶体智力的智力分类或智力差异的层次模型。然而，除了一般的 c 因子之外，对集体智慧基因组的因子结构的进一步解释和概念化仍然缺失。
=== Controversies ===
Other scholars explain team performance by aggregating team members' general intelligence to the team level<ref>{{Cite journal|last=LePine|first=Jeffery A.|title=Adaptation of Teams in Response to Unforeseen Change: Effects of Goal Difficulty and Team Composition in Terms of Cognitive Ability and Goal Orientation|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=90|issue=6|pages=1153–1167|doi=10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1153|year=2005|pmid=16316271}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Tziner|first=Aharon|last2=Eden|first2=Dov|title=Effects of crew composition on crew performance: Does the whole equal the sum of its parts?|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=70|issue=1|pages=85–93|doi=10.1037/0021-9010.70.1.85|year=1985}}</ref> instead of building an own overall collective intelligence measure. Devine and Philips<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Devine|first=Dennis J.|last2=Philips|first2=Jennifer L.|date=2001-10-01|title=Do Smarter Teams Do Better A Meta-Analysis of Cognitive Ability and Team Performance|journal=Small Group Research|volume=32|issue=5|pages=507–532|doi=10.1177/104649640103200501}}</ref> (2001) showed in a meta-analysis that mean cognitive ability predicts team performance in laboratory settings (.37) as well as field settings (.14) – note that this is only a small effect. Suggesting a strong dependence on the relevant tasks, other scholars showed that tasks requiring a high degree of communication and cooperation are found to be most influenced by the team member with the lowest cognitive ability.<ref>{{Cite journal|author1=O'Brien, G. |author2=Owens, A.|date=1969|title=Effects of organizational structure on correlations between member abilities and group productivity|url=|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology |volume=53 |issue=6|pages=525–530|doi=10.1037/h0028659|pmid=}}</ref> Tasks in which selecting the best team member is the most successful strategy, are shown to be most influenced by the member with the highest cognitive ability.<ref name="Yip 48–55"/>
Other scholars explain team performance by aggregating team members' general intelligence to the team level instead of building an own overall collective intelligence measure. Devine and Philips (2001) showed in a meta-analysis that mean cognitive ability predicts team performance in laboratory settings (.37) as well as field settings (.14) – note that this is only a small effect. Suggesting a strong dependence on the relevant tasks, other scholars showed that tasks requiring a high degree of communication and cooperation are found to be most influenced by the team member with the lowest cognitive ability. Tasks in which selecting the best team member is the most successful strategy, are shown to be most influenced by the member with the highest cognitive ability.
其他学者通过将团队成员的一般智力汇总到团队水平来解释团队表现，而不是建立一个自己的整体集体智力测量。Devine 和 Philips (2001)在一项荟萃分析中指出，认知能力可以预测实验室环境(0.37)和现场环境(0.14)下的团队表现。注意，这只是一个很小的影响。其他学者的研究表明，对相关任务的依赖性较强，需要高度沟通与合作的任务被认知能力最低的团队成员影响最大。选择最好的团队成员是最成功的策略的任务，被证明受认知能力最高的成员的影响最大。
Since Woolley et al.'s<ref name=":0" /> results do not show any influence of group satisfaction, [[group cohesiveness]], or motivation, they, at least implicitly, challenge these concepts regarding the importance for group performance in general and thus contrast meta-analytically proven evidence concerning the positive effects of [[Group cohesiveness|group cohesion]],<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Evans|first=Charles R.|last2=Dion|first2=Kenneth L.|date=1991-05-01|title=Group Cohesion and Performance A Meta-Analysis|journal=Small Group Research|volume=22|issue=2|pages=175–186|doi=10.1177/1046496491222002}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Gully|first=Stanley M.|last2=Devine|first2=Dennis J.|last3=Whitney|first3=David J.|date=2012-12-01|title=A Meta-Analysis of Cohesion and Performance Effects of Level of Analysis and Task Interdependence|journal=Small Group Research|volume=43|issue=6|pages=702–725|doi=10.1177/1046496412468069}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Beal|first=Daniel J.|last2=Cohen|first2=Robin R.|last3=Burke|first3=Michael J.|last4=McLendon|first4=Christy L.|title=Cohesion and Performance in Groups: A Meta-Analytic Clarification of Construct Relations.|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=88|issue=6|pages=989–1004|doi=10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.989|pmid=14640811|date=December 2003}}</ref> motivation<ref>{{Cite journal|last=O'leary-kelly|first=Anne M.|last2=Martocchio|first2=Joseph J.|last3=Frink|first3=Dwight D.|date=1994-10-01|title=A Review of the Influence of Group Goals on Group Performance|url=http://amj.aom.org/content/37/5/1285|journal=Academy of Management Journal|volume=37|issue=5|pages=1285–1301|doi=10.2307/256673|jstor=256673}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kleingeld|first=Ad|last2=Mierlo|first2=Heleen van|last3=Arends|first3=Lidia|title=The effect of goal setting on group performance: A meta-analysis|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=96|issue=6|pages=1289–1304|doi=10.1037/a0024315|pmid=21744940|year=2011}}</ref> and satisfaction<ref>{{Cite journal|author1=Duffy, M. K. |author2=Shaw, J. D. |author3= Stark, E. M. |last-author-amp=yes |date=2000|title=Performance and satisfaction in conflicted interdependent groups: When and how does selfesteem make a difference?|url=|journal=Academy of Management Journal |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=772–782|doi=10.2307/1556367|pmid=|jstor=1556367 }}</ref> on group performance.
Since Woolley et al.'s motivation and satisfaction on group performance.
自从伍利等人。动机和满意度对团队绩效的影响。
Noteworthy is also that the involved researchers among the confirming findings widely overlap with each other and with the authors participating in the original first study around Anita Woolley.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":11"/><ref name=":11" /><ref name=":4" /><ref name=":12" /><ref name=":13" />
Noteworthy is also that the involved researchers among the confirming findings widely overlap with each other and with the authors participating in the original first study around Anita Woolley.
值得注意的是，参与研究的研究人员在确认研究结果时，彼此之间以及参与最初围绕安妮塔 · 伍利进行的第一次研究的作者之间都有广泛的重叠。
== Alternative mathematical techniques ==
=== Computational collective intelligence ===
[[File:Computational collective intelligence.jpg|thumb|Computational Collective Intelligence, by Tadeusz Szuba]]
Computational Collective Intelligence, by Tadeusz Szuba
计算集体智慧，作者: Tadeusz Szuba
In 2001, Tadeusz (Tad) Szuba from the [[Akademia Górniczo-Hutnicza|AGH University]] in Poland proposed a formal model for the phenomenon of collective intelligence. It is assumed to be an unconscious, random, parallel, and distributed computational process, run in mathematical logic by the social structure.<ref name="szuba">Szuba T., ''Computational Collective Intelligence'', 420 pages, Wiley NY, 2001</ref>
In 2001, Tadeusz (Tad) Szuba from the AGH University in Poland proposed a formal model for the phenomenon of collective intelligence. It is assumed to be an unconscious, random, parallel, and distributed computational process, run in mathematical logic by the social structure.
2001年，波兰 AGH 大学的 Tadeusz (Tad) Szuba 提出了集体智慧现象的正式模型。它被认为是一个无意识的、随机的、平行的、分布式的计算过程，通过社会结构在数理逻辑中运行。
In this model, beings and information are modeled as abstract information molecules carrying expressions of mathematical logic.<ref name="szuba" /> They are quasi-randomly displacing due to their interaction with their environments with their intended displacements.<ref name="szuba" /> Their interaction in abstract computational space creates multi-thread inference process which we perceive as collective intelligence.<ref name="szuba" /> Thus, a non-[[Alan Turing|Turing]] model of computation is used. This theory allows simple formal definition of collective intelligence as the property of [[social structure]] and seems to be working well for a wide spectrum of beings, from bacterial colonies up to human social structures. Collective intelligence considered as a specific computational process is providing a straightforward explanation of several social phenomena. For this model of collective intelligence, the formal definition of IQS (IQ Social) was proposed and was defined as "the probability function over the time and domain of N-element inferences which are reflecting inference activity of the social structure".<ref name="szuba" /> While IQS seems to be computationally hard, modeling of social structure in terms of a computational process as described above gives a chance for approximation.<ref name="szuba" /> Prospective applications are optimization of companies through the maximization of their IQS, and the analysis of drug resistance against collective intelligence of bacterial colonies.<ref name="szuba"/>
In this model, beings and information are modeled as abstract information molecules carrying expressions of mathematical logic. They are quasi-randomly displacing due to their interaction with their environments with their intended displacements. Their interaction in abstract computational space creates multi-thread inference process which we perceive as collective intelligence. Thus, a non-Turing model of computation is used. This theory allows simple formal definition of collective intelligence as the property of social structure and seems to be working well for a wide spectrum of beings, from bacterial colonies up to human social structures. Collective intelligence considered as a specific computational process is providing a straightforward explanation of several social phenomena. For this model of collective intelligence, the formal definition of IQS (IQ Social) was proposed and was defined as "the probability function over the time and domain of N-element inferences which are reflecting inference activity of the social structure". While IQS seems to be computationally hard, modeling of social structure in terms of a computational process as described above gives a chance for approximation. Prospective applications are optimization of companies through the maximization of their IQS, and the analysis of drug resistance against collective intelligence of bacterial colonies.
在这个模型中，生命和信息被模拟为带有数理逻辑表达式的抽象信息分子。由于它们与环境的相互作用以及预期的位移，它们是准随机位移。它们在抽象计算空间中的相互作用产生了我们称之为集体智能的多线程推理过程。因此，使用了一个非图灵计算模型。这个理论允许将集体智慧作为社会结构的属性进行简单的形式化定义，并且似乎在从细菌群落到人类社会结构的广泛范围内都很有效。集体智慧被认为是一种特定的计算过程，它为几种社会现象提供了直接的解释。对于这种集体智力模型，提出了 IQS (IQ Social)的正式定义，并将其定义为“反映社会结构推理活动的 n 元素推理在时间和领域上的概率密度函数”。尽管智商测试看起来很难计算，但是根据上面描述的计算过程对社会结构进行建模提供了一个近似的机会。前瞻性应用是通过最大化企业的智商，以及对细菌菌落集体智慧的耐药性分析，对企业进行优化。
=== Collective intelligence quotient ===
One measure sometimes applied, especially by more artificial intelligence focused theorists, is a "collective intelligence quotient"<ref name="auto">{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=_tHmKrpSeEQC&pg=PA141&lpg=PA141&dq=collective+intelligence+quotient#v=onepage|title=Computational Collective Intelligence. Semantic Web, Social Networks and Multiagent Systems: First International Conference, ICCCI 2009, Wroclaw, Poland, October 5–7, 2009, Proceedings|last=Kowalczyk|first=Ryszard|date=2009-09-23|publisher=Springer Science & Business Media|isbn=9783642044403}}</ref> (or "cooperation quotient") – which can be normalized from the "individual" [[intelligence quotient]] (IQ)<ref name="auto"/> – thus making it possible to determine the marginal intelligence added by each new individual participating in the [[collective action]], thus using [[Metric (mathematics)|metrics]] to avoid the hazards of [[group think]] and [[stupidity]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/collective-iq.html|title=About Collective IQ - Doug Engelbart Institute|last=Administrator|website=www.dougengelbart.org|access-date=2016-12-11}}</ref>
One measure sometimes applied, especially by more artificial intelligence focused theorists, is a "collective intelligence quotient" (or "cooperation quotient") – which can be normalized from the "individual" intelligence quotient (IQ)
有时候，特别是对于那些更关注人工智能的理论家来说，一个常用的衡量标准就是“集体智商”(或者“合作商数”) ，这个标准可以从“个人”智商(IQ)中归一化
== Applications ==
==== Elicitation of point estimates ====
Here, the goal is to get an estimate (in a single value) of something. For example, estimating the weight of an object, or the release date of a product or probability of success of a project etc. as seen in prediction markets like Intrade, HSX or InklingMarkets and also in several implementations of crowdsourced estimation of a numeric outcome. Essentially, we try to get the average value of the estimates provided by the members in the crowd.
Here, the goal is to get an estimate (in a single value) of something. For example, estimating the weight of an object, or the release date of a product or probability of success of a project etc. as seen in prediction markets like Intrade, HSX or InklingMarkets and also in several implementations of crowdsourced estimation of a numeric outcome. Essentially, we try to get the average value of the estimates provided by the members in the crowd.
在这里，目标是得到一个估计(在一个单一的价值)的东西。例如，估计一个对象的重量，或者一个产品的发布日期，或者一个项目的成功概率等等。在 Intrade、 HSX 或 InklingMarkets 等预测市场，以及数字结果的众包估计实现中都可以看到这一点。本质上，我们试图得到人群中成员提供的估计值的平均值。
==== Opinion aggregation ====
In this situation, opinions are gathered from the crowd regarding an idea, issue or product. For example, trying to get a rating (on some scale) of a product sold online (such as Amazon's star rating system). Here, the emphasis is to collect and simply aggregate the ratings provided by customers/users.
In this situation, opinions are gathered from the crowd regarding an idea, issue or product. For example, trying to get a rating (on some scale) of a product sold online (such as Amazon's star rating system). Here, the emphasis is to collect and simply aggregate the ratings provided by customers/users.
在这种情况下，从人群中收集关于一个想法、问题或产品的意见。例如，试图获得在线销售产品的评级(在一定规模上)(如亚马逊的星级评级系统)。这里的重点是收集并简单地汇总客户 / 用户提供的评级。
==== Idea Collection ====
In these problems, someone solicits ideas for projects, designs or solutions from the crowd. For example, ideas on solving a [[data science]] problem (as in [[Kaggle]]) or getting a good design for a T-shirt (as in [[Threadless]]) or in getting answers to simple problems that only humans can do well (as in Amazon's Mechanical Turk). The objective is to gather the ideas and devise some selection criteria to choose the best ideas.
In these problems, someone solicits ideas for projects, designs or solutions from the crowd. For example, ideas on solving a data science problem (as in Kaggle) or getting a good design for a T-shirt (as in Threadless) or in getting answers to simple problems that only humans can do well (as in Amazon's Mechanical Turk). The objective is to gather the ideas and devise some selection criteria to choose the best ideas.
在这些问题中，有人从人群中征求项目、设计或解决方案的想法。例如，解决数据科学问题的想法(比如在 Kaggle) ，为 t 恤设计好的想法(比如在 Threadless) ，或者为只有人类才能解决的简单问题找到答案的想法(比如在亚马逊的土耳其机器人上)。目的是收集想法，并设计一些选择标准，以选择最好的想法。
[[James Surowiecki]] divides the advantages of disorganized decision-making into three main categories, which are cognition, cooperation and coordination.<ref name="Surowiecki"/>{{full citation needed|date=November 2017}}
James Surowiecki divides the advantages of disorganized decision-making into three main categories, which are cognition, cooperation and coordination.
James Surowiecki 将无组织决策的优势分为三大类: 认知型、合作型和协调型。
=== Cognition ===
==== Market judgment ====
Because of the Internet's ability to rapidly convey large amounts of information throughout the world, the use of collective intelligence to predict stock prices and stock price direction has become increasingly viable.<ref name=":22">{{Cite book|last=Kaplan|first=Craig A.|year=2001|url=http://www.iqco.com/consulting/Kaplan_TESADI_Final.pdf|journal=Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Conference|volume=5|pages=2893–2898|via=|doi=10.1109/ICSMC.2001.971949|isbn=978-0-7803-7087-6|title=Collective intelligence: A new approach to stock price forecasting}}</ref> Websites aggregate stock market information that is as current as possible so professional or amateur stock analysts can publish their viewpoints, enabling amateur investors to submit their financial opinions and create an aggregate opinion.<ref name=":22" /> The opinion of all investor can be weighed equally so that a pivotal premise of the effective application of collective intelligence can be applied: the masses, including a broad spectrum of stock market expertise, can be utilized to more accurately predict the behavior of financial markets.<ref>{{cite book|doi=10.1007/978-3-642-15420-1|last1=Ma|first1=Ying|last2=Li|first2=Guanyi|last3=Dong|first3=Yingsai|last4=Qin|first4=Zengchang|title=Minority Game Data Mining for Stock Market Predictions|journal=Agents and Data Mining Interaction, 6th International Workshopon Agents and Data Mining Interaction, ADMI 2010|volume=5980|year=2010|url=http://icmll.buaa.edu.cn/publications/Conference%20Papers/LectureNotesCS/ADMI.pdf|series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science|isbn=978-3-642-15419-5|bibcode=2010LNCS.5980.....C|access-date=2 March 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121021040736/http://icmll.buaa.edu.cn/publications/Conference%20Papers/LectureNotesCS/ADMI.pdf|archive-date=21 October 2012|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|doi=10.1007/978-3-642-23935-9_24|last1=Yu|first1=Du|last2=Dong|first2=Yingsai|last3=Qin|first3=Zengchang|last4=Wan|first4=Tao|title=Exploring Market Behaviors with Evolutionary Mixed-Games Learning Model|journal=Computational Collective Intelligence. Technologies and Applications – Third International Conference, ICCCI 2011|volume=6922|year=2011|url=http://dsd.future-lab.cn/research/publications/2011/ICCCI-springer.pdf|pages=244–253|series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science|isbn=978-3-642-23934-2}}</ref>
Because of the Internet's ability to rapidly convey large amounts of information throughout the world, the use of collective intelligence to predict stock prices and stock price direction has become increasingly viable. Websites aggregate stock market information that is as current as possible so professional or amateur stock analysts can publish their viewpoints, enabling amateur investors to submit their financial opinions and create an aggregate opinion.
由于互联网能够在全世界迅速传递大量信息，利用集体智慧预测股票价格和股票价格走向已变得越来越可行。网站聚合尽可能最新的股票市场信息，这样专业或业余股票分析师可以发表他们的观点，使业余投资者提交他们的金融意见和创造一个聚合的意见。
Collective intelligence underpins the [[efficient-market hypothesis]] of [[Eugene Fama]]<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Fama | first1 = E.F. | year = 1970 | title = Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work | url = | journal = Journal of Finance | volume = 25 | issue = 2| pages = 383–417 | doi=10.2307/2325486| jstor = 2325486 }}</ref> – although the term collective intelligence is not used explicitly in his paper. Fama cites research conducted by [[Michael C. Jensen|Michael Jensen]]<ref name=":23">{{cite journal | last1 = Jensen | first1 = M.C | year = 1967 | title = The Performance of Mutual Funds in the Period 1945–1964 | journal = Journal of Finance | volume = 23 | issue = 2| pages = 389–416 | doi=10.1111/j.1540-6261.1968.tb00815.x| hdl = 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1968.tb00815.x | hdl-access = free }}</ref> in which 89 out of 115 selected funds underperformed relative to the index during the period from 1955 to 1964. But after removing the loading charge (up-front fee) only 72 underperformed while after removing brokerage costs only 58 underperformed. On the basis of such evidence [[index fund]]s became popular investment vehicles using the collective intelligence of the market, rather than the judgement of professional fund managers, as an investment strategy.<ref name=":23" />
Collective intelligence underpins the efficient-market hypothesis of Eugene Fama – although the term collective intelligence is not used explicitly in his paper. Fama cites research conducted by Michael Jensen in which 89 out of 115 selected funds underperformed relative to the index during the period from 1955 to 1964. But after removing the loading charge (up-front fee) only 72 underperformed while after removing brokerage costs only 58 underperformed. On the basis of such evidence index funds became popular investment vehicles using the collective intelligence of the market, rather than the judgement of professional fund managers, as an investment strategy.
集体智慧支撑着 Eugene Fama 的效率市场假说，尽管在他的论文中并没有明确使用集体智慧这个术语。法玛引用了迈克尔•詹森(Michael Jensen)进行的一项研究。在1955年至1964年期间，选定的115只基金中，有89只表现不及指数。但是在去除加载费(预付费)之后，只有72个股票表现不佳，而去除经纪成本之后，只有58个股票表现不佳。在这些证据的基础上，指数基金成为流行的投资工具，利用市场的集体智慧，而不是专业基金经理的判断，作为一种投资策略。
==== Predictions in politics and technology ====
[[File:U.S. states (and territories) by election methods, 2016.svg|thumb|Voting methods used in the United States 2016]]
Voting methods used in the United States 2016
美国2016年的投票方式
Political parties mobilize large numbers of people to form policy, select candidates and finance and run election campaigns.<ref name=":24">{{Cite web|url=http://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/11168/vote-amount-according-to-intelligence|title=Vote amount according to "intelligence"|website=politics.stackexchange.com|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref> Knowledge focusing through various [[voting]] methods allows perspectives to converge through the assumption that uninformed voting is to some degree random and can be filtered from the decision process leaving only a residue of informed consensus.<ref name=":24" /> Critics point out that often bad ideas, misunderstandings, and misconceptions are widely held, and that structuring of the decision process must favor experts who are presumably less prone to random or misinformed voting in a given context.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9907.html|title=Landemore, H.: Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many. (eBook and Paperback)|website=press.princeton.edu|access-date=2016-12-04}}</ref>
Political parties mobilize large numbers of people to form policy, select candidates and finance and run election campaigns. Knowledge focusing through various voting methods allows perspectives to converge through the assumption that uninformed voting is to some degree random and can be filtered from the decision process leaving only a residue of informed consensus.
各政党动员大量民众制定政策，选择候选人，资助和开展竞选活动。通过各种投票方法聚焦的知识可以通过假设无知投票在某种程度上是随机的，并且可以从决策过程中过滤掉，只留下知情共识的残留，从而使观点趋于一致。
Companies such as Affinnova (acquired by Nielsen), [[Google]], [[InnoCentive]], [[Marketocracy]], and [[Threadless]]<ref name=":17">{{Cite journal|last=Bonabeau|first=E|year=2009|title=The power of collective intelligence|journal=MIT Sloan Management Review|volume=50|pages=45–52|id={{ProQuest|224962498}}}}</ref> have successfully employed the concept of collective intelligence in bringing about the next generation of technological changes through their research and development (R&D), customer service, and knowledge management.<ref name=":17" /><ref>{{Cite report|last=Malone|first=Thomas W.|last2=Laubacher|first2=Robert|last3=Dellarocas|first3=Chrysanthos|date=2009-02-03|title=Harnessing Crowds: Mapping the Genome of Collective Intelligence|ssrn=1381502|location=Rochester, NY|publisher=Social Science Research Network|id=MIT Sloan Research Paper No. 4732-09}}</ref> An example of such application is Google's Project Aristotle in 2012, where the effect of collective intelligence on team makeup was examined in hundreds of the company's R&D teams.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/magazine/what-google-learned-from-its-quest-to-build-the-perfect-team.html|title=What Google Learned From Its Quest to Build the Perfect Team|last=Duhigg|first=Charles|date=2016-02-25|newspaper=The New York Times|access-date=2016-12-11}}</ref>
Companies such as Affinnova (acquired by Nielsen), Google, InnoCentive, Marketocracy, and Threadless have successfully employed the concept of collective intelligence in bringing about the next generation of technological changes through their research and development (R&D), customer service, and knowledge management. An example of such application is Google's Project Aristotle in 2012, where the effect of collective intelligence on team makeup was examined in hundreds of the company's R&D teams.
像 Affinnova (被尼尔森收购)、 Google、 InnoCentive、 Marketocracy 和 Threadless 这样的公司已经成功地运用了集体智慧的概念，通过他们的研发、客户服务和知识管理，带来了下一代的技术变革。这种应用的一个例子是2012年谷歌的亚里士多德项目，在该项目中，集体智慧对团队组成的影响在数百个公司的研发团队中得到了检验。
=== Cooperation ===
==== Networks of trust ====
[[File:Application of collective intelligence in Millennium Project.png|thumb|left|Application of collective intelligence in the Millennium Project]]
Application of collective intelligence in the Millennium Project
集体智慧在千年项目中的应用
In 2012, the ''Global Futures Collective Intelligence System'' (GFIS) was created by [[The Millennium Project]],<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.millennium-project.org/millennium/GFIS.html|title=Global Futures Intelligence System|website=www.millennium-project.org|access-date=2016-12-07}}</ref> which epitomizes collective intelligence as the synergistic intersection among data/information/knowledge, software/hardware, and expertise/insights that has a recursive learning process for better decision-making than the individual players alone.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.millennium-project.org/millennium/GFIS.html|title=Global Futures Intelligence System|website=www.millennium-project.org|access-date=2016-12-11}}</ref>
In 2012, the Global Futures Collective Intelligence System (GFIS) was created by The Millennium Project, which epitomizes collective intelligence as the synergistic intersection among data/information/knowledge, software/hardware, and expertise/insights that has a recursive learning process for better decision-making than the individual players alone.
2012年，千年项目创建了全球未来集体智慧系统(GFIS) ，该系统集中体现了集体智慧，即数据 / 信息 / 知识、软件 / 硬件以及专门知识 / 见解之间的协同交汇，具有一个循环学习过程，以比单个行为者更好地做出决策。
[[New media]] are often associated with the promotion and enhancement of collective intelligence. The ability of new media to easily store and retrieve information, predominantly through databases and the Internet, allows for it to be shared without difficulty. Thus, through interaction with new media, knowledge easily passes between sources {{Harv|Flew|2008}} resulting in a form of collective intelligence. The use of interactive new media, particularly the internet, promotes online interaction and this distribution of knowledge between users.
New media are often associated with the promotion and enhancement of collective intelligence. The ability of new media to easily store and retrieve information, predominantly through databases and the Internet, allows for it to be shared without difficulty. Thus, through interaction with new media, knowledge easily passes between sources resulting in a form of collective intelligence. The use of interactive new media, particularly the internet, promotes online interaction and this distribution of knowledge between users.
新媒体往往与促进和提高集体智慧联系在一起。新媒体能够方便地存储和检索信息，主要是通过数据库和互联网，使它能够毫无困难地被共享。因此，通过与新媒体的互动，知识很容易在资源之间传递，从而形成一种集体智慧。互动新媒体的使用，特别是互联网，促进了在线互动和用户之间的知识传播。
[[Francis Heylighen]], [[Valentin Turchin]], and Gottfried Mayer-Kress are among those who view collective intelligence through the lens of computer science and [[cybernetics]]. In their view, the Internet enables collective intelligence at the widest, planetary scale, thus facilitating the emergence of a [[global brain]].
Francis Heylighen, Valentin Turchin, and Gottfried Mayer-Kress are among those who view collective intelligence through the lens of computer science and cybernetics. In their view, the Internet enables collective intelligence at the widest, planetary scale, thus facilitating the emergence of a global brain.
弗朗西斯 · 海莱恩(Francis Heylighen)、瓦伦丁 · 图尔钦(Valentin Turchin)和戈特弗里德 · 梅耶-克雷斯(Gottfried Mayer-Kress)等人都是从计算机科学和控制论的角度来看待集体智慧的。在他们看来，互联网使集体智慧在最广泛的，全球规模，从而促进了全球大脑的出现。
The developer of the World Wide Web, [[Tim Berners-Lee]], aimed to promote sharing and publishing of information globally. Later his employer opened up the technology for free use. In the early '90s, the Internet's potential was still untapped, until the mid-1990s when 'critical mass', as termed by the head of the Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA), Dr. [[J.C.R. Licklider]], demanded more accessibility and utility.<ref name="Weiss, A. 2005 pp. 19-23">Weiss, A. (2005). The Power of Collective Intelligence. Collective Intelligence, pp. 19–23</ref> The driving force of this Internet-based collective intelligence is the digitization of information and communication. [[Henry Jenkins]], a key theorist of new media and media convergence draws on the theory that collective intelligence can be attributed to media convergence and participatory culture {{Harv|Flew|2008}}. He criticizes contemporary education for failing to incorporate online trends of collective problem solving into the classroom, stating "whereas a collective intelligence community encourages ownership of work as a group, schools grade individuals". Jenkins argues that interaction within a knowledge community builds vital skills for young people, and teamwork through collective intelligence communities contribute to the development of such skills.<ref name=":25">{{Cite web|url=http://labweb.education.wisc.edu/curric606/readings/Jenkins2002.pdf|title=INTERACTIVE AUDIENCES? THE 'COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE' OF MEDIA FANS|last=Henry|first=Jenkins|access-date=December 11, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180426232104/https://labweb.education.wisc.edu/curric606/readings/Jenkins2002.pdf|archive-date=26 April 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref> Collective intelligence is not merely a quantitative contribution of information from all cultures, it is also qualitative.<ref name=":25" />
The developer of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners-Lee, aimed to promote sharing and publishing of information globally. Later his employer opened up the technology for free use. In the early '90s, the Internet's potential was still untapped, until the mid-1990s when 'critical mass', as termed by the head of the Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA), Dr. J.C.R. Licklider, demanded more accessibility and utility. The driving force of this Internet-based collective intelligence is the digitization of information and communication. Henry Jenkins, a key theorist of new media and media convergence draws on the theory that collective intelligence can be attributed to media convergence and participatory culture . He criticizes contemporary education for failing to incorporate online trends of collective problem solving into the classroom, stating "whereas a collective intelligence community encourages ownership of work as a group, schools grade individuals". Jenkins argues that interaction within a knowledge community builds vital skills for young people, and teamwork through collective intelligence communities contribute to the development of such skills. Collective intelligence is not merely a quantitative contribution of information from all cultures, it is also qualitative.
万维网的开发者，蒂姆伯纳斯李，旨在促进全球信息的共享和发布。后来，他的雇主开放了这项技术供免费使用。在90年代早期，互联网的潜力还没有被开发出来，直到90年代中期，高级研究计划署(ARPA)负责人 j.c.r 博士称之为“临界质量”。Licklider 要求更多的可访问性和实用性。这种基于互联网的集体智慧的驱动力是信息和通信的数字化。新媒体和 media concentration 的核心理论家 Henry Jenkins 提出了集体智慧可以归因于 media concentration 和参与式文化的理论。他批评当代教育未能将集体解决问题的在线趋势纳入课堂，指出“而集体智慧社区鼓励作为一个团体、学校为个人工作的所有权”。詹金斯认为，知识社区内的互动为年轻人建立了重要的技能，通过集体智慧社区的团队合作有助于这些技能的发展。集体智慧不仅仅是来自所有文化的信息的定量贡献，它也是定性的。
[[Pierre Lévy|Lévy]] and [[Derrick de Kerckhove|de Kerckhove]] consider CI from a mass communications perspective, focusing on the ability of networked information and communication technologies to enhance the community knowledge pool. They suggest that these communications tools enable humans to interact and to share and collaborate with both ease and speed (Flew 2008). With the development of the [[Internet]] and its widespread use, the opportunity to contribute to knowledge-building communities, such as [[Wikipedia]], is greater than ever before. These computer networks give participating users the opportunity to store and to retrieve knowledge through the collective access to these databases and allow them to "harness the hive"<ref>{{Cite book|title=New Media: an introduction.|last=Flew|first=Terry|publisher=Oxford University Press.|year=2008|isbn=|location=Melbourne|pages=|quote=|via=}}</ref> Researchers at the [[MIT Center for Collective Intelligence]] research and explore collective intelligence of groups of people and computers.<ref>[http://cci.mit.edu/people/index.html MIT Center for Collective Intelligence] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100611041615/http://cci.mit.edu/people/index.html |date=11 June 2010 }}. Cci.mit.edu. Retrieved on 2013-07-13.</ref>
Lévy and de Kerckhove consider CI from a mass communications perspective, focusing on the ability of networked information and communication technologies to enhance the community knowledge pool. They suggest that these communications tools enable humans to interact and to share and collaborate with both ease and speed (Flew 2008). With the development of the Internet and its widespread use, the opportunity to contribute to knowledge-building communities, such as Wikipedia, is greater than ever before. These computer networks give participating users the opportunity to store and to retrieve knowledge through the collective access to these databases and allow them to "harness the hive" Researchers at the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence research and explore collective intelligence of groups of people and computers.
L vy 和 de Kerckhove 从大众传播的角度考虑 CI，关注网络信息和通信技术增强社区知识库的能力。他们认为这些通信工具使人类能够轻松快捷地互动、分享和协作(Flew 2008)。随着互联网的发展及其广泛应用，向维基百科等知识建设社区作出贡献的机会比以往任何时候都大。这些计算机网络使参与的用户有机会通过集体访问这些数据库来存储和检索知识，并使他们能够“利用蜂群”。麻省理工学院集体智慧中心(MIT Center for Collective Intelligence)的研究人员进行研究，探索集体智慧中的人和计算机。
In this context collective intelligence is often confused with [[shared knowledge]]. The former is the sum total of information held individually by members of a community while the latter is information that is believed to be true and known by all members of the community.<ref>Jenkins, H. 2006. ''[https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780814742815 Convergence Culture]''. New York: New York University Press.</ref> Collective intelligence as represented by [[Web 2.0]] has less user engagement than [[collaborative intelligence]]. An art project using Web 2.0 platforms is "Shared Galaxy", an experiment developed by an anonymous artist to create a collective identity that shows up as one person on several platforms like MySpace, Facebook, YouTube and Second Life. The password is written in the profiles and the accounts named "Shared Galaxy" are open to be used by anyone. In this way many take part in being one.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Scardamalia|first=Marlene|last2=Bereiter|first2=Carl|date=1994-07-01|title=Computer Support for Knowledge-Building Communities|journal=Journal of the Learning Sciences|volume=3|issue=3|pages=265–283|doi=10.1207/s15327809jls0303_3|citeseerx=10.1.1.600.463}}</ref> Another art project using collective intelligence to produce artistic work is Curatron, where a large group of artists together decides on a smaller group that they think would make a good collaborative group. The process is used based on an algorithm computing the collective preferences<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.vocativ.com/culture/art-culture/math-takes-guessing-art-curation/|title=Math Takes the Guessing Out of Artistic Collaboration|date=9 July 2014|publisher=}}</ref> In creating what he calls 'CI-Art', Nova Scotia based artist Mathew Aldred follows Pierry Lévy's definition of collective intelligence.<ref>Mathew Aldred, May 2016. {{cite web|title=What is Collective Intelligence Art?|year=2016|url=http://www.collectiveintelligenceart.ca/collective-intelligence-art.html|access-date=1 October 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161002024912/http://www.collectiveintelligenceart.ca/collective-intelligence-art.html|archive-date=2 October 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> Aldred's CI-Art event in March 2016 involved over four hundred people from the community of Oxford, Nova Scotia, and internationally.<ref>Amherst News Citizen Record, March 17, 2016. {{cite web|title=Community creation taking place in Oxford|year=2016|url=http://www.cumberlandnewsnow.com/News/Local/2016-03-17/article-4469315/Community-creation-taking-place-in-Oxford/1|access-date=1 October 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161006015018/http://www.cumberlandnewsnow.com/News/Local/2016-03-17/article-4469315/Community-creation-taking-place-in-Oxford/1|archive-date=6 October 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>Oxford Regional Education Centre{{cite web|title=Nexus OREC|year=2016|url=http://www.goldenbears.ca/nexus-orec.html|access-date=1 October 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161006014256/http://www.goldenbears.ca/nexus-orec.html|archive-date=6 October 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> Later work developed by Aldred used the UNU [[swarm intelligence]] system to create digital drawings and paintings.<ref>UNU Interview with artist, May 23, 2016. {{cite web|title=Artwork from an emergent hive mind|year=2016|url=http://unu.ai/ci-art/}}</ref> The Oxford Riverside Gallery (Nova Scotia) held a public CI-Art event in May 2016, which connected with online participants internationally.<ref>Oxford Riverside Gallery News, May 2016. {{cite web|title=CI-Art event at Oxford Riverside Gallery 'Nexus' opening|year=2016|url=http://www.oxfordriversidegallery.ca/news/ci-art-event-at-oxford-riverside-gallery-nexus-opening}}</ref>
In this context collective intelligence is often confused with shared knowledge. The former is the sum total of information held individually by members of a community while the latter is information that is believed to be true and known by all members of the community. Collective intelligence as represented by Web 2.0 has less user engagement than collaborative intelligence. An art project using Web 2.0 platforms is "Shared Galaxy", an experiment developed by an anonymous artist to create a collective identity that shows up as one person on several platforms like MySpace, Facebook, YouTube and Second Life. The password is written in the profiles and the accounts named "Shared Galaxy" are open to be used by anyone. In this way many take part in being one. Another art project using collective intelligence to produce artistic work is Curatron, where a large group of artists together decides on a smaller group that they think would make a good collaborative group. The process is used based on an algorithm computing the collective preferences In creating what he calls 'CI-Art', Nova Scotia based artist Mathew Aldred follows Pierry Lévy's definition of collective intelligence. Aldred's CI-Art event in March 2016 involved over four hundred people from the community of Oxford, Nova Scotia, and internationally. Later work developed by Aldred used the UNU swarm intelligence system to create digital drawings and paintings. The Oxford Riverside Gallery (Nova Scotia) held a public CI-Art event in May 2016, which connected with online participants internationally.
在这种情况下，集体智慧常常与共享知识相混淆。前者是社区成员个人掌握的信息的总和，而后者是社区所有成员都相信是真实的和知道的信息。以 Web 2.0为代表的集体智慧与协同智能相比，用户参与度更低。使用 Web 2.0平台的一个艺术项目是“共享银河”(Shared Galaxy) ，这是一位匿名艺术家开发的一个实验，目的是创建一个集体身份，在 MySpace、 Facebook、 YouTube 和“第二人生”(Second Life)等多个平台上以一个人的形。密码写在个人资料中，名为“ Shared Galaxy”的账户可供任何人使用。以这种方式，许多人参与成为一个。另一个利用集体智慧来创作艺术作品的艺术项目是 Curatron，在这个项目中，一大群艺术家一起决定组建一个较小的团队，他们认为这个团队可以成为一个很好的合作团队。这个过程是基于计算集体偏好的算法来进行的。在创造他所谓的“集体艺术”时，新斯科舍艺术家马修 · 奥尔德雷德遵循皮埃尔 · 维对集体智慧的定义。2016年3月，来自新斯科舍牛津大学和世界各地的400多人参加了奥尔德雷德的 CI-Art 活动。后来的工作由 Aldred 开发，他使用联合国大学的群体智能系统来创作数码素描和绘画。2016年5月，牛津河畔美术馆(新斯科舍)举办了一次公开的 CI-Art 活动，与国际在线参与者取得了联系。
[[File:Collaborative tagging.png|thumb|Parenting social network and collaborative tagging as pillars for automatic IPTV content blocking system]]
Parenting social network and collaborative tagging as pillars for automatic IPTV content blocking system
为人父母的社交网络和分众分类法电视作为 IPTV 内容自动屏蔽系统的支柱
In [[social bookmarking]] (also called collaborative tagging),<ref name=":26">{{Cite book|last=Millen|first=David R.|last2=Feinberg|first2=Jonathan|last3=Kerr|first3=Bernard|date=2006-01-01|title=Dogear: Social Bookmarking in the Enterprise|journal=Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems|series=CHI '06|location=New York, NY, USA|publisher=ACM|pages=111–120|doi=10.1145/1124772.1124792|isbn=978-1595933720}}</ref> users assign tags to resources shared with other users, which gives rise to a type of information organisation that emerges from this [[crowdsourcing]] process. The resulting information structure can be seen as reflecting the collective knowledge (or collective intelligence) of a community of users and is commonly called a "[[Folksonomy]]", and the process can be captured by [[models of collaborative tagging]].<ref name=":26" />
In social bookmarking (also called collaborative tagging), users assign tags to resources shared with other users, which gives rise to a type of information organisation that emerges from this crowdsourcing process. The resulting information structure can be seen as reflecting the collective knowledge (or collective intelligence) of a community of users and is commonly called a "Folksonomy", and the process can be captured by models of collaborative tagging.
在社会性书签中，用户将标签分配给与其他用户共享的资源，这就产生了一种从众包过程中涌现出来的信息组织分众分类法。由此产生的信息结构可以被视为反映了一个用户社区的集体知识(或集体智慧) ，通常被称为“大众分类法” ，这个过程可以被分众分类法的模型捕捉到。
Recent research using data from the social bookmarking website [[Delicious (website)|Delicious]], has shown that collaborative tagging systems exhibit a form of [[complex system]]s (or [[Self-organization|self-organizing]]) dynamics.<ref name="WWW07-ref" >Harry Halpin, Valentin Robu, Hana Shepherd [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1242572.1242602 The Complex Dynamics of Collaborative Tagging], Proceedings 6th International Conference on the World Wide Web (WWW'07), Banff, Canada, pp. 211–220, ACM Press, 2007.</ref><ref>{{cite book|doi=10.1145/1460563.1460600|last1=Fu|first1=Wai-Tat|title=Semantic imitation in social tagging|journal=ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction|pages=229|year=2010|isbn=9781605580074}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Fu|first1=Wai-Tat|title=A Semantic Imitation Model of Social Tagging.|journal=Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Social Computing|pages=66–72|date=August 2009|doi=10.1109/CSE.2009.382|isbn=978-1-4244-5334-4}}</ref> Although there is no central controlled vocabulary to constrain the actions of individual users, the distributions of tags that describe different resources has been shown to converge over time to a stable [[power law]] distributions.<ref name="WWW07-ref" /> Once such stable distributions form, examining the [[correlation]]s between different tags can be used to construct simple folksonomy graphs, which can be efficiently partitioned to obtained a form of community or shared vocabularies.<ref name="TWEB-ref" >Valentin Robu, Harry Halpin, Hana Shepherd [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1594173.1594176 Emergence of consensus and shared vocabularies in collaborative tagging systems], ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB), Vol. 3(4), article 14, ACM Press, September 2009.</ref> Such vocabularies can be seen as a form of collective intelligence, emerging from the decentralised actions of a community of users. The Wall-it Project is also an example of social bookmarking.<ref>Carlos J. Costa, January 2012. {{cite web|title=Article on Wall-it project|year=2012|url=http://masteropensource.wordpress.com/2012/01/21/wall-it/}}</ref>
Recent research using data from the social bookmarking website Delicious, has shown that collaborative tagging systems exhibit a form of complex systems (or self-organizing) dynamics. Although there is no central controlled vocabulary to constrain the actions of individual users, the distributions of tags that describe different resources has been shown to converge over time to a stable power law distributions. Such vocabularies can be seen as a form of collective intelligence, emerging from the decentralised actions of a community of users. The Wall-it Project is also an example of social bookmarking.
最近的研究使用来自社会性书签美味书签网站的数据，已经表明分众分类法系统展示了一种复杂系统(或自组织)动态的形式。虽然没有中央受控词表来约束单个用户的行为，但是描述不同资源的标签的分布已经被证明会随着时间的推移逐渐趋于稳定的幂律分布。这样的词汇可以被看作是一种集体智慧的形式，来自于用户群体的分散行为。墙-it 项目也是社会性书签的一个例子。
==== P2P business ====
Research performed by Tapscott and Williams has provided a few examples of the benefits of collective intelligence to business:<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Research performed by Tapscott and Williams has provided a few examples of the benefits of collective intelligence to business:
泰普斯科特和威廉姆斯的研究为集体智慧对商业的好处提供了几个例子:
;Talent utilization
Talent utilization
人才利用
:At the rate technology is changing, no firm can fully keep up in the innovations needed to compete. Instead, smart firms are drawing on the power of mass collaboration to involve participation of the people they could not employ. This also helps generate continual interest in the firm in the form of those drawn to new idea creation as well as investment opportunities.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
At the rate technology is changing, no firm can fully keep up in the innovations needed to compete. Instead, smart firms are drawing on the power of mass collaboration to involve participation of the people they could not employ. This also helps generate continual interest in the firm in the form of those drawn to new idea creation as well as investment opportunities.
按照技术变化的速度，没有一家公司能够完全跟上竞争所需的创新。相反，聪明的公司正在利用大规模合作的力量，让那些他们无法雇用的人参与进来。这也有助于产生持续的兴趣，在公司的形式，吸引到新的想法创造以及投资机会。
;Demand creation
Demand creation
需求创造
:Firms can create a new market for complementary goods by engaging in open source community. Firms also are able to expand into new fields that they previously would not have been able to without the addition of resources and collaboration from the community. This creates, as mentioned before, a new market for complementary goods for the products in said new fields.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Firms can create a new market for complementary goods by engaging in open source community. Firms also are able to expand into new fields that they previously would not have been able to without the addition of resources and collaboration from the community. This creates, as mentioned before, a new market for complementary goods for the products in said new fields.
公司可以通过参与开源社区为互补产品创造一个新的市场。企业也能够扩展到新的领域，如果没有社区的资源和合作，它们以前无法做到这一点。如前所述，这为上述新领域的产品创造了一个新的补充商品市场。
;Costs reduction
Costs reduction
降低成本
:Mass collaboration can help to reduce costs dramatically. Firms can release a specific software or product to be evaluated or debugged by online communities. The results will be more personal, robust and error-free products created in a short amount of time and costs. New ideas can also be generated and explored by collaboration of online communities creating opportunities for free R&D outside the confines of the company.<ref name="Tapscott, D. 2008" />
Mass collaboration can help to reduce costs dramatically. Firms can release a specific software or product to be evaluated or debugged by online communities. The results will be more personal, robust and error-free products created in a short amount of time and costs. New ideas can also be generated and explored by collaboration of online communities creating opportunities for free R&D outside the confines of the company.
大规模合作可以帮助大幅降低成本。公司可以发布一个特定的软件或产品，由在线社区进行评估或调试。结果将是更加个性化，健壮和无错误的产品创建在短时间内和成本。通过在线社区的合作，也可以产生和探索新的想法，为公司之外的免费研发创造机会。
==== Open source software ====
Cultural theorist and online community developer, John Banks considered the contribution of online fan communities in the creation of the [[Trainz]] product. He argued that its commercial success was fundamentally dependent upon "the formation and growth of an active and vibrant online fan community that would both actively promote the product and create content- extensions and additions to the game software".<ref name="jbanks">John A.L. Banks. ''Negotiating Participatory Culture in the New Media Environment: Auran and the Trainz Online Community – An (Im)possible Relation'', The University of Queensland. School of English, Media Studies and Art History. MelbourneDAC2003</ref>
Cultural theorist and online community developer, John Banks considered the contribution of online fan communities in the creation of the Trainz product. He argued that its commercial success was fundamentally dependent upon "the formation and growth of an active and vibrant online fan community that would both actively promote the product and create content- extensions and additions to the game software".
文化理论家和在线社区开发者约翰 · 班克斯考虑了在线粉丝社区对 Trainz 产品创造的贡献。他认为，其商业成功从根本上取决于“一个活跃而充满活力的在线粉丝社区的形成和发展，这个社区将积极推广该产品，并为游戏软件提供内容扩展和附加功能”。
The increase in user created content and interactivity gives rise to issues of control over the game itself and ownership of the player-created content. This gives rise to fundamental legal issues, highlighted by Lessig<ref>L, Lessig,(2006)Code Version 2.0 (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books.</ref> and Bray and Konsynski,<ref>Bray, DA & Konsynski, BR, 2007, ''Virtual Worlds, Virtual Economies, Virtual Institutions'', viewed 10 October 2008, p. 1-27 <http://ssrn.com/abstract=962501></ref> such as [[intellectual property]] and property ownership rights.
The increase in user created content and interactivity gives rise to issues of control over the game itself and ownership of the player-created content. This gives rise to fundamental legal issues, highlighted by Lessig and Bray and Konsynski, such as intellectual property and property ownership rights.
用户创建的内容和交互性的增加引起了对游戏本身的控制和玩家创建的内容的所有权问题。这就产生了一些基本的法律问题，Lessig、 Bray 和 Konsynski 强调了这些问题，如知识产权和财产所有权。
Gosney extends this issue of Collective Intelligence in videogames one step further in his discussion of [[alternate reality gaming]]. This genre, he describes as an "across-media game that deliberately blurs the line between the in-game and out-of-game experiences"<ref name=":27">Gosney, J.W, 2005, ''Beyond Reality: A Guide to Alternate Reality Gaming'', Thomson Course Technology, Boston.</ref> as events that happen outside the game reality "reach out" into the player's lives in order to bring them together. Solving the game requires "the collective and collaborative efforts of multiple players"; thus the issue of collective and collaborative team play is essential to ARG. Gosney argues that the Alternate Reality genre of gaming dictates an unprecedented level of collaboration and "collective intelligence" in order to solve the mystery of the game.<ref name=":27" />
Gosney extends this issue of Collective Intelligence in videogames one step further in his discussion of alternate reality gaming. This genre, he describes as an "across-media game that deliberately blurs the line between the in-game and out-of-game experiences" as events that happen outside the game reality "reach out" into the player's lives in order to bring them together. Solving the game requires "the collective and collaborative efforts of multiple players"; thus the issue of collective and collaborative team play is essential to ARG. Gosney argues that the Alternate Reality genre of gaming dictates an unprecedented level of collaboration and "collective intelligence" in order to solve the mystery of the game.
在讨论交替现实游戏时，戈斯尼将集体智慧这个问题在电子游戏中进一步扩展。他将这种游戏形容为“跨媒体游戏，故意模糊游戏内外体验之间的界限” ，因为游戏之外发生的事件会“触及”玩家的生活，从而将它们联系在一起。解决这个游戏需要“多个参与者的集体和协作努力” ，因此集体和协作的团队游戏问题对 ARG 来说是必不可少的。戈斯尼认为，虚拟现实游戏的类型决定了前所未有的合作水平和“集体智慧” ，以解决游戏的神秘性。
==== Benefits of co-operation ====
Co-operation helps to solve most important and most interesting multi-science problems. In his book, James Surowiecki mentioned that most scientists think that benefits of co-operation have much more value when compared to potential costs. Co-operation works also because at best it guarantees number of different viewpoints. Because of the possibilities of technology global co-operation is nowadays much easier and productive than before. It is clear that, when co-operation goes from university level to global it has significant benefits.
Co-operation helps to solve most important and most interesting multi-science problems. In his book, James Surowiecki mentioned that most scientists think that benefits of co-operation have much more value when compared to potential costs. Co-operation works also because at best it guarantees number of different viewpoints. Because of the possibilities of technology global co-operation is nowadays much easier and productive than before. It is clear that, when co-operation goes from university level to global it has significant benefits.
合作有助于解决最重要和最有趣的多学科问题。詹姆斯•索罗维茨基(James Surowiecki)在他的书中提到，大多数科学家认为，与潜在成本相比，合作的好处更有价值。合作之所以奏效，还因为它充其量只能保证不同观点的数量。由于技术的可能性，全球合作现在比以前更加容易和富有成效。显然，当合作从大学层面进入全球层面时，它会带来显著的好处。
For example, why do scientists co-operate? Science has become more and more isolated and each science field has spread even more and it is impossible for one person to be aware of all developments. This is true especially in experimental research where highly advanced equipment requires special skills. With co-operation scientists can use information from different fields and use it effectively instead of gathering all the information just by reading by themselves."<ref name="Surowiecki">Surowiecki, J., 2007 'The Wisdom of crowds. Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few'</ref>{{full citation needed|date=November 2017}}
For example, why do scientists co-operate? Science has become more and more isolated and each science field has spread even more and it is impossible for one person to be aware of all developments. This is true especially in experimental research where highly advanced equipment requires special skills. With co-operation scientists can use information from different fields and use it effectively instead of gathering all the information just by reading by themselves."
例如，为什么科学家要合作？科学已经变得越来越孤立，每一个科学领域已经蔓延得更多，一个人不可能意识到所有的发展。这是真的，特别是在实验研究中，高度先进的设备需要特殊的技能。通过合作，科学家们可以利用不同领域的信息，并有效地加以利用，而不是仅仅通过自己阅读来收集所有的信息。”
=== Coordination ===
==== Ad-hoc communities ====
Military, trade unions, and corporations satisfy some definitions of CI – the most rigorous definition would require a capacity to respond to very arbitrary conditions without orders or guidance from "law" or "customers" to constrain actions. Online advertising companies are using collective intelligence to bypass traditional marketing and creative agencies.<ref>Lee, Sang M., et al. "Success factors of platform leadership in web 2.0 service business." Service Business 4.2 (2010): 89–103.</ref>
Military, trade unions, and corporations satisfy some definitions of CI – the most rigorous definition would require a capacity to respond to very arbitrary conditions without orders or guidance from "law" or "customers" to constrain actions. Online advertising companies are using collective intelligence to bypass traditional marketing and creative agencies.
军事、工会和公司满足 CI 的某些定义——最严格的定义要求有能力对非常武断的条件作出反应，而不需要”法律”或”客户”的命令或指导来约束行动。在线广告公司正在利用集体智慧来绕过传统的营销和创意机构。
The [https://web.archive.org/web/20151103044224/http://unu.ai/ UNU] open platform for "human swarming" (or "social swarming") establishes real-time closed-loop systems around groups of networked users molded after biological swarms, enabling human participants to behave as a unified collective intelligence.<ref name="Human Swarms">{{cite web|url=http://news.discovery.com/human/life/swarms-of-humans-power-a-i-platform-150603.htm|title=Swarms of Humans Power A.I. Platform|last=DNews|date=3 June 2015|publisher=}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|url=https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/ecal2015/ch117.html|first1=Louis B.|title=07/20/2015-07/24/2015|last1=Rosenberg|first2=Unanimous|last2=A.I.|first3=San|last3=Francisco|last4=California|last5=USA|date=1 January 2016|volume=13|pages=658–659|doi=10.7551/978-0-262-33027-5-ch117|isbn=9780262330275|access-date=12 October 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151027132802/https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/ecal2015/ch117.html|archive-date=27 October 2015|url-status=dead|df=dmy-all}}</ref> When connected to UNU, groups of distributed users collectively answer questions and make predictions in real-time.<ref>Rosenberg, L.B., "Human swarming, a real-time method for parallel distributed intelligence," in Swarm/Human Blended Intelligence Workshop (SHBI), 2015, vol., no., pp.1–7, 28–29 Sept. 2015 doi: [https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SHBI.2015.7321685 10.1109/SHBI.2015.7321685]</ref> Early testing shows that human swarms can out-predict individuals.<ref name="Human Swarms"/> In 2016, an UNU swarm was challenged by a reporter to predict the winners of the Kentucky Derby, and successfully picked the first four horses, in order, beating 540 to 1 odds.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newsweek.com/artificial-intelligence-turns-20-11000-kentucky-derby-bet-457783|title=Artificial intelligence turns $20 into $11,000 in Kentucky Derby bet|date=10 May 2016|publisher=}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/06/02/what-happened-when-an-ai-hive-mind-answered-reddits-burning-politics-questions/|title=What happened when an A.I. hive mind answered Reddit's burning politics questions|first=Abby|last=Ohlheiser|date=2 June 2016|publisher=|via=washingtonpost.com}}</ref>
The [https://web.archive.org/web/20151103044224/http://unu.ai/ UNU] open platform for "human swarming" (or "social swarming") establishes real-time closed-loop systems around groups of networked users molded after biological swarms, enabling human participants to behave as a unified collective intelligence. When connected to UNU, groups of distributed users collectively answer questions and make predictions in real-time. Early testing shows that human swarms can out-predict individuals.
这个[ https://web.archive.org/web/20151103044224/http://UNU.ai/ 联合国大学]的开放平台为“人类群集”(或“社会群集”)建立了一个实时的闭环系统，围绕着被塑造成生物群集的网络用户群，使人类参与者能够表现为一个统一的集体智慧。当连接到联合国大学时，分布式用户组集体回答问题并实时作出预测。早期的测试表明，人类群体能够预测个体。
Specialized information sites such as Digital Photography Review<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dpreview.com/|title=Digital Photography Review|website=www.dpreview.com|access-date=2016-12-07}}</ref> or Camera Labs<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.cameralabs.com/|title=Camera reviews, DSLR reviews, lens reviews, photography guides {{!}} Cameralabs|website=www.cameralabs.com|access-date=2016-12-07}}</ref> is an example of collective intelligence. Anyone who has an access to the internet can contribute to distributing their knowledge over the world through the specialized information sites.
Specialized information sites such as Digital Photography Review or Camera Labs is an example of collective intelligence. Anyone who has an access to the internet can contribute to distributing their knowledge over the world through the specialized information sites.
专门的信息网站如数码摄影评论或相机实验室就是集体智慧的一个例子。任何能够上网的人都可以通过专门的信息网站在全世界传播他们的知识。
In [[learner-generated context]] a group of users marshal resources to create an ecology that meets their needs often (but not only) in relation to the co-configuration, co-creation and co-design of a particular learning space that allows learners to create their own context.<ref>Luckin, R., du Boulay, B., Smith, H., Underwood, J., Fitzpatrick, G., Holmberg, J., Kerawalla, L., Tunley, H., Brewster, D. and Pearce, D. (2005), '[http://srodev.sussex.ac.uk/403/1/jime.pdf Using Mobile Technology to Create Flexible Learning Contexts] '. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 22.</ref><ref>Luckin, R. (2006), Understanding Learning Contexts as Ecologies of Resources: From the Zone of Proximal Development to Learner Generated Contexts. Paper presented at the Proceedings of World Conference on Elearning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2006.</ref><ref>Luckin, R., Shurville, S. and Browne, T. (2007), '[https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10036/13334/blankfile.xxxx?sequence=1 Initiating e-learning by stealth, participation and consultation in a late majority institution]'. {{open access}} ''Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change'', '''3''' (3), 317–332. {{doi|10.1386/jots.3.3.317_1}}</ref> Learner-generated contexts represent an ''ad hoc'' community that facilitates coordination of collective action in a network of trust. An example of learner-generated context is found on the Internet when collaborative users pool knowledge in a "[[shared intelligence]] space". As the Internet has developed so has the concept of CI as a shared public forum. The global accessibility and availability of the Internet has allowed more people than ever to contribute and access ideas. (Flew 2008)
In learner-generated context a group of users marshal resources to create an ecology that meets their needs often (but not only) in relation to the co-configuration, co-creation and co-design of a particular learning space that allows learners to create their own context. Learner-generated contexts represent an ad hoc community that facilitates coordination of collective action in a network of trust. An example of learner-generated context is found on the Internet when collaborative users pool knowledge in a "shared intelligence space". As the Internet has developed so has the concept of CI as a shared public forum. The global accessibility and availability of the Internet has allowed more people than ever to contribute and access ideas. (Flew 2008)
在学习者生成的环境中，一组用户调动资源来创建一个生态系统，这个生态系统经常(但不仅仅是)满足学习者的需求，通过对特定学习空间的共同配置、共同创造和共同设计，使学习者能够创建自己的环境。学习者产生的环境代表了一个特殊的社区，促进了信任网络中集体行动的协调。在互联网上发现了一个学习者生成上下文的例子，即协作用户在一个”共享的情报空间”中汇集知识。随着互联网的发展，CI 作为一个共享的公共论坛的概念也随之产生。互联网的全球可及性和可用性使得比以往任何时候都更多的人能够贡献和获得想法。(《飞越2008》)
Games such as ''[[The Sims]]'' Series, and ''[[Second Life]]'' are designed to be non-linear and to depend on collective intelligence for expansion. This way of sharing is gradually evolving and influencing the mindset of the current and future generations.<ref name="Weiss, A. 2005 pp. 19-23"/> For them, collective intelligence has become a norm. In Terry Flew's discussion of '[[interactivity]]' in the online games environment, the ongoing interactive dialogue between users and game developers,<ref>Flew, Terry and Humphreys, Sal (2005) "Games: Technology, Industry, Culture" in Terry Flew, New Media: An Introduction (2nd edn), Oxford University Press, South Melbourne 101–114.</ref> he refers to Pierre Lévy's concept of Collective Intelligence {{Harv|Lévy|1998}} and argues this is active in videogames as clans or guilds in [[MMORPG]] constantly work to achieve goals. [[Henry Jenkins]] proposes that the participatory cultures emerging between games producers, media companies, and the end-users mark a fundamental shift in the nature of media production and consumption. Jenkins argues that this new participatory culture arises at the intersection of three broad new media trends.<ref>Henry Jenkins (2002) in Flew, Terry and Humphreys, Sal (2005) ''Games: Technology, Industry, Culture'' in Terry Flew, New Media: An Introduction (2nd edn), Oxford University Press, South Melbourne 101–114.</ref> Firstly, the development of new media tools/technologies enabling the creation of content. Secondly, the rise of subcultures promoting such creations, and lastly, the growth of value adding media conglomerates, which foster image, idea and narrative flow.
Games such as The Sims Series, and Second Life are designed to be non-linear and to depend on collective intelligence for expansion. This way of sharing is gradually evolving and influencing the mindset of the current and future generations. he refers to Pierre Lévy's concept of Collective Intelligence and argues this is active in videogames as clans or guilds in MMORPG constantly work to achieve goals. Henry Jenkins proposes that the participatory cultures emerging between games producers, media companies, and the end-users mark a fundamental shift in the nature of media production and consumption. Jenkins argues that this new participatory culture arises at the intersection of three broad new media trends. Firstly, the development of new media tools/technologies enabling the creation of content. Secondly, the rise of subcultures promoting such creations, and lastly, the growth of value adding media conglomerates, which foster image, idea and narrative flow.
像模拟人生系列和第二人生这样的游戏被设计成非线性的，依靠集体智慧来扩展。这种分享方式正在逐渐演变，并影响着今世后代的心态。他引用了皮埃尔 · l · 维的集体智慧的概念，并认为这一概念在电子游戏中非常活跃，因为 MMORPG 中的部落或行会不断努力以实现目标。亨利 · 詹金斯提出，游戏制作者、媒体公司和最终用户之间出现的参与性文化标志着媒体生产和消费性质的根本性转变。詹金斯认为，这种新的参与式文化产生于三大新媒体趋势的交汇点。首先，开发新的媒体工具 / 技术，使创作内容成为可能。其次，亚文化的兴起促进了这种创造，最后，传媒集团的价值增长，促进了形象、观念和叙事流程的形成。
==== Coordinating collective actions ====
[[File:Improvisational_actors.jpg|thumb|The cast of After School Improv learns an important lesson about improvisation and life]]
The cast of After School Improv learns an important lesson about improvisation and life
课后即兴表演的演员们学到了一堂关于即兴表演和生活的重要课程
Improvisational actors also experience a type of collective intelligence which they term "group mind", as theatrical improvisation relies on mutual cooperation and agreement,<ref name=":18">{{Cite journal|last=Vera|first=Dusya|last2=Crossan|first2=Mary|date=2004-06-01|title=Theatrical Improvisation: Lessons for Organizations|journal=Organization Studies|volume=25|issue=5|pages=727–749|doi=10.1177/0170840604042412}}</ref> leading to the unity of "group mind".<ref name=":18" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last=*|first=R. Keith Sawyer|date=2004-06-01|title=Improvised lessons: collaborative discussion in the constructivist classroom|journal=Teaching Education|volume=15|issue=2|pages=189–201|doi=10.1080/1047621042000213610}}</ref>
Improvisational actors also experience a type of collective intelligence which they term "group mind", as theatrical improvisation relies on mutual cooperation and agreement, leading to the unity of "group mind".
即兴表演者还体验到一种他们称之为”群体心智”的集体智慧，因为戏剧性的即兴表演依赖于相互合作和协议，从而导致”群体心智”的统一。
Growth of the Internet and mobile telecom has also produced "swarming" or "rendezvous" events that enable meetings or even dates on demand.<ref name="Wolpert arXiv:cs/9905004"/> The full impact has yet to be felt but the [[anti-globalization movement]], for example, relies heavily on e-mail, cell phones, pagers, SMS and other means of organizing.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=vskz1poDuvoC&pg=PR7&dq=anti+globalization+collective+intelligence#v=onepage|title=Globalization / Anti-Globalization: Beyond the Great Divide|last=Held|first=David|last2=McGrew|first2=Anthony|date=2007-11-19|publisher=Polity|isbn=9780745639116}}</ref> The [[Indymedia]] organization does this in a more journalistic way.<ref name=":19">{{Cite web|url=http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2001/09/11129.html|title='Anti-Globals' Use Internet As Collective Intelligence – UK Indymedia|website=www.indymedia.org.uk|access-date=2016-12-11}}</ref> Such resources could combine into a form of collective intelligence accountable only to the current participants yet with some strong moral or linguistic guidance from generations of contributors – or even take on a more obviously democratic form to advance shared goal.<ref name=":19" />
Growth of the Internet and mobile telecom has also produced "swarming" or "rendezvous" events that enable meetings or even dates on demand. The Indymedia organization does this in a more journalistic way. Such resources could combine into a form of collective intelligence accountable only to the current participants yet with some strong moral or linguistic guidance from generations of contributors – or even take on a more obviously democratic form to advance shared goal.
互联网和移动电信的发展也产生了”蜂拥”或”汇合”活动，使会议甚至日期按需而定。印第媒体以一种更新闻化的方式做到了这一点。这种资源可以结合成一种只对当前参与者负责的集体智慧形式，再加上几代捐助者提供的一些强有力的道德或语言指导，甚至可以采取一种更明显的民主形式来推进共同目标。
A further application of collective intelligence is found in the "Community Engineering for Innovations".<ref name="Idea Competitions">Jan Marco Leimeister, Michael Huber, Ulrich Bretschneider, Helmut Krcmar (2009): Leveraging Crowdsourcing: Activation-Supporting Components for IT-Based Ideas Competition. In: Journal of Management Information Systems (2009), Volume: 26, Issue: 1, Publisher: M.E. Sharpe Inc., Pages: 197–224, {{ISSN|0742-1222}}, {{doi|10.2753/MIS0742-1222260108}} [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1653890], Winfried Ebner; Jan Marco Leimeister; Helmut Krcmar (2009): Community Engineering for Innovations – The Ideas Competition as a method to nurture a Virtual Community for Innovations. In: R&D Management, 39 (4), pp 342–356 {{doi|10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00564.x}} [https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/219672/1/JML_145.pdf]</ref> In such an integrated framework proposed by Ebner et al., idea competitions and virtual communities are combined to better realize the potential of the collective intelligence of the participants, particularly in open-source R&D.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Ebner|first=Winfried|last2=Leimeister|first2=Jan Marco|last3=Krcmar|first3=Helmut|date=2009-09-01|title=Community engineering for innovations: the ideas competition as a method to nurture a virtual community for innovations|journal=R&D Management|volume=39|issue=4|pages=342–356|doi=10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00564.x|url=https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/219699/1/JML_173.pdf}}</ref> In management theory the use of collective intelligence and crowd sourcing leads to innovations and very robust answers to quantitative issues.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Fladerer |first1=Johannes-Paul |last2=Kurzmann |first2=Ernst |title=WISDOM OF THE MANY : how to create self -organisation and how to use collective... intelligence in companies and in society from mana. |date=November 2019 |publisher=BOOKS ON DEMAND |isbn=9783750422421 |url=https://www.bod.de/buchshop/the-wisdom-of-the-many-johannes-paul-fladerer-9783750422421 |language=de}}</ref> Therefore, collective intelligence and crowd sourcing is not necessaryly leading to the best solution to economic problems, but to a stable, good solution.
A further application of collective intelligence is found in the "Community Engineering for Innovations". In such an integrated framework proposed by Ebner et al., idea competitions and virtual communities are combined to better realize the potential of the collective intelligence of the participants, particularly in open-source R&D. In management theory the use of collective intelligence and crowd sourcing leads to innovations and very robust answers to quantitative issues. Therefore, collective intelligence and crowd sourcing is not necessaryly leading to the best solution to economic problems, but to a stable, good solution.
集体智慧的进一步应用可以在“创新社区工程”中找到。在 Ebner 等人提出的这样一个集成框架中，创意竞赛和虚拟社区被结合起来，以更好地实现参与者集体智慧的潜力，特别是在开源研发领域。在管理理论中，集体智慧和群体外包的使用导致了创新和对量化问题非常有力的答案。因此，集体智慧和群体外包并不是解决经济问题的最佳方案，而是一个稳定、良好的解决方案。
==== Coordination in different types of tasks ====
Collective actions or tasks require different amounts of coordination depending on the complexity of the task. Tasks vary from being highly independent simple tasks that require very little coordination to complex interdependent tasks that are built by many individuals and require a lot of coordination. In the article written by Kittur, Lee and Kraut the writers introduce a problem in cooperation: "When tasks require high coordination because the work is highly interdependent, having more contributors can increase process losses, reducing the effectiveness of the group below what individual members could optimally accomplish". Having a team too large the overall effectiveness may suffer even when the extra contributors increase the resources. In the end the overall costs from coordination might overwhelm other costs.<ref>Kittur, A., Lee, B. and Kraut, R. E. (2009) '[https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1518928 Coordination in collective intelligence: The role of team structure and task interdependence]', Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings, pp. 1495–1504.</ref>
Collective actions or tasks require different amounts of coordination depending on the complexity of the task. Tasks vary from being highly independent simple tasks that require very little coordination to complex interdependent tasks that are built by many individuals and require a lot of coordination. In the article written by Kittur, Lee and Kraut the writers introduce a problem in cooperation: "When tasks require high coordination because the work is highly interdependent, having more contributors can increase process losses, reducing the effectiveness of the group below what individual members could optimally accomplish". Having a team too large the overall effectiveness may suffer even when the extra contributors increase the resources. In the end the overall costs from coordination might overwhelm other costs.
集体行动或任务需要不同程度的协调，这取决于任务的复杂程度。任务可以是高度独立的简单任务，需要很少的协调，也可以是复杂的相互依赖的任务，这些任务是由许多个人构建的，需要大量的协调。在 Kittur、 Lee 和 Kraut 撰写的文章中，作者介绍了合作中的一个问题: ”当任务需要高度协调，因为工作是高度相互依赖的，有更多的贡献者可能会增加过程损失，降低团队的有效性，低于个别成员可以最佳完成的水平”。即使额外的捐助者增加了资源，如果团队过于庞大，整体效率可能会受到影响。最后，协调的总成本可能超过其他成本。
Group collective intelligence is a property that emerges through coordination from both bottom-up and top-down processes. In a bottom-up process the different characteristics of each member are involved in contributing and enhancing coordination. Top-down processes are more strict and fixed with norms, group structures and routines that in their own way enhance the group's collective work.<ref>[18] Woolley, A. W., Aggarwal, I. and Malone, T. W. (2015) 'Collective Intelligence and Group Performance', Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(6), pp. 420–424.</ref>
Group collective intelligence is a property that emerges through coordination from both bottom-up and top-down processes. In a bottom-up process the different characteristics of each member are involved in contributing and enhancing coordination. Top-down processes are more strict and fixed with norms, group structures and routines that in their own way enhance the group's collective work.
群体集体智慧是通过自下而上和自上而下过程的协调而产生的一种属性。在自下而上的过程中，每个成员的不同特点都参与促进和加强协调。自上而下的程序更加严格，有规范、小组结构和惯例，以自己的方式加强小组的集体工作。
== Alternative views ==
===A tool for combating self-preservation===
Tom Atlee reflects that, although humans have an innate ability to gather and analyze data, they are affected by culture, education and social institutions.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=YV4dCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA140|title=In Search of The Black Seed|last=Abdul-Karim|first=Kashif|date=2015-11-23|publisher=Lulu.com|isbn=9781329694897|page=140}}{{self-published source|date=February 2020}}</ref>{{self-published inline|date=February 2020}} A single person tends to make decisions motivated by self-preservation. Therefore, without collective intelligence, humans may drive themselves into extinction based on their selfish needs.<ref name=":21">Atlee, T. (2008). [http://www.communicationagents.com/tom_atlee/2008/05/15/reflections_on_the_evolution_of_choice_and_collective_intelligence.htm Reflections on the evolution of choice and collective intelligence] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080522033150/http://www.communicationagents.com/tom_atlee/2008/05/15/reflections_on_the_evolution_of_choice_and_collective_intelligence.htm |date=22 May 2008 }}, Retrieved 26 August 2008</ref>
Tom Atlee reflects that, although humans have an innate ability to gather and analyze data, they are affected by culture, education and social institutions. A single person tends to make decisions motivated by self-preservation. Therefore, without collective intelligence, humans may drive themselves into extinction based on their selfish needs.
汤姆 · 阿特利认为，虽然人类天生就有收集和分析数据的能力，但是他们受到文化、教育和社会制度的影响。一个人倾向于做出由自我保存驱动的决定。因此，如果没有集体智慧，人类可能会因为自私的需求而将自己逼入绝境。
===Separation from IQism===
Phillip Brown and Hugh Lauder quotes Bowles and [[Herbert Gintis|Gintis]] (1976) that in order to truly define collective intelligence, it is crucial to separate 'intelligence' from IQism.<ref name=":28">{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/education/2001/jun/18/socialsciences.highereducation1|title=Capitalism and Social Progress by Phillip Brown and Hugh Lauder (cont... )|date=2001-06-18|newspaper=The Guardian|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref> They go on to argue that intelligence is an achievement and can only be developed if allowed to.<ref name=":28" /> For example, earlier on, groups from the lower levels of society are severely restricted from aggregating and pooling their intelligence. This is because the elites fear that the collective intelligence would convince the people to rebel. If there is no such capacity and relations, there would be no infrastructure on which collective intelligence is built {{Harv|Brown|Lauder|2000|p=230}}. This reflects how powerful collective intelligence can be if left to develop.<ref name=":28" />
Phillip Brown and Hugh Lauder quotes Bowles and Gintis (1976) that in order to truly define collective intelligence, it is crucial to separate 'intelligence' from IQism. They go on to argue that intelligence is an achievement and can only be developed if allowed to. For example, earlier on, groups from the lower levels of society are severely restricted from aggregating and pooling their intelligence. This is because the elites fear that the collective intelligence would convince the people to rebel. If there is no such capacity and relations, there would be no infrastructure on which collective intelligence is built . This reflects how powerful collective intelligence can be if left to develop.
菲利普•布朗(Phillip Brown)和休•兰黛(Hugh Lauder)引用鲍尔斯(Bowles)和金蒂斯(Gintis)(1976)的话称，为了真正定义集体智慧，将“智慧”与智商分离至关重要。他们继续争辩说，智力是一种成就，只有在被允许的情况下才能得到发展。例如，早些时候，来自社会底层的群体在聚集和汇集他们的智力方面受到严格限制。这是因为精英阶层担心集体情报会说服人民造反。如果没有这种能力和关系，就不会有建立集体智慧的基础设施。这反映了如果任其发展，集体智慧是多么强大。
===Artificial intelligence views===
Skeptics, especially those critical of artificial intelligence and more inclined to believe that risk of [[bodily harm]] and bodily action are the basis of all unity between people, are more likely to emphasize the capacity of a group to take action and withstand harm as one fluid [[mass mobilization]], shrugging off harms the way a body shrugs off the loss of a few cells.<ref name=":29">{{Cite web|url=http://www.johnzerzan.net/radio/|title=John Zerzan: anti-civilization theorist, writer and speaker|website=www.johnzerzan.net|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref><ref name=":31">{{Cite journal|last=Moore|first=Jason W.|date=2001-01-01|editor-last=Arrighi|editor-first=Giovanni|editor2-last=Silver|editor2-first=Beverly J.|title=Globalization in Historical Perspective|journal=Science & Society|volume=65|issue=3|pages=386–397|doi=10.1521/siso.65.3.386.17767|jstor=40403938}}</ref> This strain of thought is most obvious in the [[anti-globalization movement]] and characterized by the works of [[John Zerzan]], [[Carol Moore]], and [[Starhawk]], who typically shun academics.<ref name=":29" /><ref name=":31"/> These theorists are more likely to refer to ecological and [[collective wisdom]] and to the role of [[consensus process]] in making ontological distinctions than to any form of "intelligence" as such, which they often argue does not exist, or is mere "cleverness".<ref name=":29" /><ref name=":31"/>
Skeptics, especially those critical of artificial intelligence and more inclined to believe that risk of bodily harm and bodily action are the basis of all unity between people, are more likely to emphasize the capacity of a group to take action and withstand harm as one fluid mass mobilization, shrugging off harms the way a body shrugs off the loss of a few cells. This strain of thought is most obvious in the anti-globalization movement and characterized by the works of John Zerzan, Carol Moore, and Starhawk, who typically shun academics. These theorists are more likely to refer to ecological and collective wisdom and to the role of consensus process in making ontological distinctions than to any form of "intelligence" as such, which they often argue does not exist, or is mere "cleverness".
怀疑论者，尤其是那些批评人工智能的人，更倾向于相信身体伤害和身体行为的风险是人与人之间所有团结的基础，更可能强调一个群体采取行动和承受伤害的能力，就像一个体液政治动员一样，无视身体对少数细胞损失的危害。这种思想倾向在《反全球化运动和《拥有属性约翰 · 泽尔赞、卡罗尔 · 摩尔和星鹰的著作中表现得最为明显，他们通常回避学者。这些理论家更可能提到生态和集体智慧以及协商一致进程在作出本体论区分方面的作用，而不是任何形式的”智慧”本身，因为他们常常认为这种智慧并不存在，或者仅仅是”聪明”。
Harsh critics of artificial intelligence on ethical grounds are likely to promote collective wisdom-building methods, such as the [[new tribalists]] and the [[Gaianism|Gaians]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://metamorphoptics.blogspot.com/|title=m e t a m o r p h o p t i c s|website=metamorphoptics.blogspot.com|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref> Whether these can be said to be collective intelligence systems is an open question. Some, e.g. [[Bill Joy]], simply wish to avoid any form of autonomous artificial intelligence and seem willing to work on rigorous collective intelligence in order to remove any possible niche for AI.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/|title=Why the Future Doesn't Need Us|last=Joy|first=Bill|newspaper=WIRED|access-date=2016-12-12}}</ref>
Harsh critics of artificial intelligence on ethical grounds are likely to promote collective wisdom-building methods, such as the new tribalists and the Gaians. Whether these can be said to be collective intelligence systems is an open question. Some, e.g. Bill Joy, simply wish to avoid any form of autonomous artificial intelligence and seem willing to work on rigorous collective intelligence in order to remove any possible niche for AI.
基于道德理由对人工智能的严厉批评可能会促进集体智慧建设方法的发展，比如新部落主义者和盖亚人。这些是否可以说是集体智慧系统还是一个悬而未决的问题。有些，例如。比尔 · 乔伊只是希望避免任何形式的自主人工智能，并且似乎愿意致力于严格的集体智能，以便为人工智能去除任何可能的利基。
In contrast to these views, Artificial Intelligence companies such as [[Amazon Mechanical Turk]] and [[CrowdFlower]] are using collective intelligence and [[crowdsourcing]] or [[consensus-based assessment]] to collect the enormous amounts of data for [[machine learning]] algorithms such as [[Keras]] and [[IBM Watson]].
In contrast to these views, Artificial Intelligence companies such as Amazon Mechanical Turk and CrowdFlower are using collective intelligence and crowdsourcing or consensus-based assessment to collect the enormous amounts of data for machine learning algorithms such as Keras and IBM Watson.
与这些观点相反，亚马逊土耳其机器人(Amazon Mechanical Turk)和 CrowdFlower 等人工智能公司正在利用集体智能和众包或基于共识的评估，为 Keras 和 IBM 沃森等机器学习算法收集大量数据。
=== Solving climate change ===
Global collective intelligence is seen as the key in solving the challenges humankind faces now and in the future. [[Climate change]] is an example of a global issue which collective intelligence is currently trying to tackle. With the help of collective intelligence applications such as online [[crowdsourcing]], people across the globe are collaborating in developing solutions to climate change.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/earth/crowdsourcing-climate-change-solutions/|title=How Millions of People Can Help Solve Climate Change — NOVA Next {{!}} PBS|date=2014-01-15|work=NOVA Next|access-date=2017-10-31}}</ref>
Global collective intelligence is seen as the key in solving the challenges humankind faces now and in the future. Climate change is an example of a global issue which collective intelligence is currently trying to tackle. With the help of collective intelligence applications such as online crowdsourcing, people across the globe are collaborating in developing solutions to climate change.
全球集体智慧被视为解决人类现在和未来面临的挑战的关键。气候变化是集体智慧目前正在努力解决的全球问题的一个例子。在诸如在线众包等集体智慧应用的帮助下，全球各地的人们正在合作开发应对气候变化的解决方案。
== See also ==
{{Div col|colwidth=25em}}
=== Similar concepts and applications ===
* [[Citizen science]]
* [[Civic intelligence]]
* [[Collaborative filtering]]
* [[Collaborative innovation network]]
* [[Collective decision-making]]
* [[Collective effervescence]]
* [[Collective memory]]
* [[Collective problem solving]]
* [[Crowd psychology]]
* [[Global Consciousness Project]]
* [[Group behaviour]]
* [[Group mind (science fiction)]]
* [[Knowledge ecosystem]]
* {{annotated link|Noogenesis}}
* [[Open source intelligence]]
* [[Recommendation system]]
* [[Smart mob]]
* [[Social commerce]]
* [[Social information processing]]
* [[Stigmergy]]
* [[Raymond Cattell#Innovations and accomplishments|Syntality]]
* ''[[The Wisdom of Crowds]]''
* [[Think tank]]
* [[Wiki]]
=== Computation and computer science ===
* [[Bees algorithm]]
* [[Cellular automaton]]
* [[Collaborative human interpreter]]
* [[Collaborative software]]
* [[Connectivity (graph theory)]]
* [[Enterprise bookmarking]]
* [[Human-based computation]]
* [[Open-source software]]
* [[Organismic computing]]
* [[Preference elicitation]]
=== Others ===
* [[Customer engagement]]
* [[Dispersed knowledge]]
* [[Distributed cognition]]
* [[Facilitation (business)]]
* [[Facilitator]]
* [[Hundredth monkey effect]]
* [[Keeping up with the Joneses]]
* [[Library]]
* [[Library of Alexandria]]
* [[Meme]]
* [[Open-space meeting]]
{{Div col end}}
== Notes and references ==
{{reflist|30em}}
== Bibliography ==
{{refbegin}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Brown | first=Philip
| last=Brown | first=Philip
第一个菲利普
| last2=Lauder | first2=Hugh
| last2=Lauder | first2=Hugh
2 Lauder | first2 Hugh
| year=2000
| year=2000
2000年
| chapter=Collective intelligence
| chapter=Collective intelligence
集体智慧
|editor=S. Baron |editor2=J. Field |editor3=T Schuller
|editor=S. Baron |editor2=J. Field |editor3=T Schuller
编辑 s。男爵 | 编辑。3 t Schuller
| title=Social Capital: Critical Perspectives
| title=Social Capital: Critical Perspectives
社会资本: 批判的视角
| publisher=Oxford University Press | location=New York |url=https://books.google.com/?id=nvivgiFfPr0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
| publisher=Oxford University Press | location=New York |url=https://books.google.com/?id=nvivgiFfPr0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
2012年10月15日，纽约，牛津 https://books.google.com/?id=nvivgiffpr0c&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage 出版社
| isbn=9780191583247 }}
| isbn=9780191583247 }}
9780191583247}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Brown | first=Philip
| last=Brown | first=Philip
第一个菲利普
| last2=Lauder | first2=Hugh
| last2=Lauder | first2=Hugh
2 Lauder | first2 Hugh
| year=2001
| year=2001
2001年
| chapter=Collective intelligence (chapter 13)
| chapter=Collective intelligence (chapter 13)
| 第十三章集体智慧
|editor=Brown |editor2=Lauder
|editor=Brown |editor2=Lauder
2 Lauder
| title=Capitalism and social progress: the future of society in a global economy
| title=Capitalism and social progress: the future of society in a global economy
| 题目: 资本主义和社会进步: 全球经济中社会的未来
| publisher=Palgrave
| publisher=Palgrave
| 出版商 Palgrave
| url=https://books.google.com/?id=rF8YDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
| url=https://books.google.com/?id=rF8YDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
Https://books.google.com/?id=rf8ydaaaqbaj&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage
| isbn=9780333985380 }}
| isbn=9780333985380 }}
9780333985380}
* {{cite journal
| last=Fadul | first=Jose A.
| last=Fadul | first=Jose A.
最后一个法杜尔 | 第一个何塞 a。
| year=2009
| year=2009
2009年
| title=Collective Learning: Applying Distributed Cognition for Collective Intelligence
| title=Collective Learning: Applying Distributed Cognition for Collective Intelligence
集体学习: 应用分布式认知促进集体智慧
| journal=The International Journal of Learning
| journal=The International Journal of Learning
国际学习期刊
| volume = 16
| volume = 16
第16卷
| issue = 4
| issue = 4
第四期
| pages= 211–220
| pages= 211–220
第211-220页
| doi=10.18848/1447-9494/cgp/v16i04/46223
| doi=10.18848/1447-9494/cgp/v16i04/46223
| doi 10.18848 / 1447-9494 / cgp / v16i04 / 46223
}}
}}
}}
* CIA. (2008). [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/xx.html ''The World Factbook'']. (accessed 3 September 2008)
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last = Fladerer | first=Johannes-Paul
| last = Fladerer | first=Johannes-Paul
| 最后一个花匠 | 第一个约翰内斯-保罗
| year=2019
| year=2019
2019年
|title=The Wisdom of the Many: How to create Self-Organisation and how to use Collective Intelligence in Companies and in Society From Management to ManagemANT
|title=The Wisdom of the Many: How to create Self-Organisation and how to use Collective Intelligence in Companies and in Society From Management to ManagemANT
| 题目: 多人的智慧: 如何建立自我组织，以及如何在公司和社会中运用集体智慧，从管理到管理
| publisher=BoD
| publisher=BoD
| 出版商 BoD
| location=Norderstedt
| location=Norderstedt
| 位置 Norderstedt
| isbn =978-3750422421
| isbn =978-3750422421
978-3750422421
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Flew | first=Terry
| last=Flew | first=Terry
最后一次飞行 | 第一次特里
| year= 2008
| year= 2008
2008年
| title=New Media: an introduction
| title=New Media: an introduction
| 标题新媒体: 介绍
| publisher=Oxford University Press | location=Melbourne
| publisher=Oxford University Press | location=Melbourne
牛津大学出版社 | 位置: 墨尔本
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Hamann | first=Heiko
| last=Hamann | first=Heiko
最后的哈曼 | 第一个海科
| year=2018
| year=2018
2018年
| title=Swarm Robotics: A Formal Approach
| title=Swarm Robotics: A Formal Approach
标题: 群机器人: 一种正式的方法
| publisher=Springer | location=New York
| publisher=Springer | location=New York
| 出版商 Springer | 位置: 纽约
| url=https://books.google.com/?id=pnNLDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false
| url=https://books.google.com/?id=pnNLDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false
Https://books.google.com/?id=pnnldwaaqbaj&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false
| isbn=9783319745282 }}
| isbn=9783319745282 }}
9783319745282}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Hofstadter | first=Douglas
| last=Hofstadter | first=Douglas
最后的侯世达 | 第一个道格拉斯
| author-link=Douglas Hofstadter
| author-link=Douglas Hofstadter
| 作者链接侯世达
| year=1979
| year=1979
1979年
| title=Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid
| title=Gödel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid
巴赫: 永恒的金色辫子
| publisher=Basic Books | location=New York
| publisher=Basic Books | location=New York
| 出版商 Basic Books | 位置: 纽约
}}
}}
}}
* Leiner, Barry, Cerf, Vinton, Clark, David, Kahn, Robert, Kleinrock, Leonard, Lynch, Daniel, Postel, Jon, Roberts, Larry and Wolff, Stephen. 2003. [http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.shtml ''A Brief History of the Internet'']. Version 3.32 (accessed 3 September 2008)
* Noubel, Jean-François; (2004, rev. 2007), "[http://publishing.yudu.com/Library/Arswi/CollectiveIntelligen/resources/index.htm?skipFlashCheck=true Collective Intelligence: the Invisible Revolution]"
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Por | first=George
| last=Por | first=George
乔治
| year=1995
| year=1995
1995年
| chapter= The Quest for Collective intelligence
| chapter= The Quest for Collective intelligence
寻求集体智慧
| editor=K. Gozdz
| editor=K. Gozdz
编辑 k。Gozdz
| title=Community Building: Renewing Spirit and Learning in Business
| title=Community Building: Renewing Spirit and Learning in Business
社区建设: 在商业中更新精神和学习
| publisher=New Leaders Press | location=San Francisco
| publisher=New Leaders Press | location=San Francisco
出版商 New Leaders 出版社旧金山
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Rheingold | first=Howard
| last=Rheingold | first=Howard
最后的莱茵戈尔德 | 第一个霍华德
| author-link=Howard Rheingold
| author-link=Howard Rheingold
| 作者链接霍华德·莱茵戈德
| year=2002
| year=2002
2002年
| title=Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution
| title=Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution
聪明的暴徒: 下一场社会革命
| publisher=Basic Books
| publisher=Basic Books
| 出版商 Basic Books
| title-link=Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution }}
| title-link=Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution }}
| 标题链接聪明的暴徒: 下一场社会革命}
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Ron | first=Sun
| last=Ron | first=Sun
第一个太阳
| year=1979
| year=1979
1979年
| title=Cognition and Multi-Agent Interaction
| title=Cognition and Multi-Agent Interaction
认知与多智能体交互
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
| publisher=Cambridge University Press
出版商剑桥大学出版社
}}
}}
}}
* Rosenberg, L. (2015). [https://web.archive.org/web/20151027132802/https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/ecal2015/ch117.html Human Swarms, a real time method for Collective Intelligence]. Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Life (ECAL 2015), pp. 658–659.
* {{cite journal | ref=harv
| last=Riedl | first=Christoph
| last=Riedl | first=Christoph
克里斯多夫
| last2=Blohm | first2=Ivo
| last2=Blohm | first2=Ivo
2 Blohm | first2 Ivo
| last3=Leimeister | first3=Jan Marco
| last3=Leimeister | first3=Jan Marco
3 Leimeister | first3 Jan Marco
| last4=Krcmar | first4=Helmut
| last4=Krcmar | first4=Helmut
4 Krcmar | first4 Helmut
| year=2010
| year=2010
2010年
| title=Rating Scales for Collective Intelligence in Innovation Communities: Why Quick and Easy Decision Making Does Not Get It Right | url=http://home.in.tum.de/~riedlc/res/RiedlEtAl2010-ICIS.pdf
| title=Rating Scales for Collective Intelligence in Innovation Communities: Why Quick and Easy Decision Making Does Not Get It Right | url=http://home.in.tum.de/~riedlc/res/RiedlEtAl2010-ICIS.pdf
为什么快速简单的决策没有得到正确的 http://home.in.tum.de/~riedlc/res/riedletal2010-icis.pdf
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite journal
| ref=harv
| ref=harv
不会有事的
| last=Leimeister
| last=Leimeister
最后的莱梅斯特
| first=Jan Marco
| first=Jan Marco
作者: Jan Marco
| year=2010
| year=2010
2010年
| title=Intelligence
| title=Intelligence
| 题目: 情报
| url=http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| url=http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
Http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726084723/http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726084723/http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| 档案-网址 https://web.archive.org/web/20110726084723/http://aisel.aisnet.org/bise/vol2/iss4/6/
| url-status=live
| url-status=live
状态直播
| archive-date=2011-07-26
| archive-date=2011-07-26
| 档案-日期2011-07-26
}}
}}
}}
* {{cite book | ref=harv | last=Roy Chowdhury | first=Soudip | last2=Rodriguez | first2=Carlos | last3=Daniel | first3=Florian | last4=Casati | first4=Fabio | year=2010 | title=Wisdom-aware computing: on the interactive recommendation of composition knowledge | pages=[https://archive.org/details/serviceorientedc0000maxi/page/144 144–155] | url=https://archive.org/details/serviceorientedc0000maxi/page/144 | isbn=9783642193934 | series=Icsoc'10 }}
* Stephen R. Diasio, Nuria Agell, "The evolution of expertise in decision support technologies: A challenge for organizations," cscwd, pp. 692–697, 2009 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, 2009. https://web.archive.org/web/20121009235747/http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/CSCWD.2009.4968139
* {{cite book|title=Uses and Abuses of Intelligence|editor1-first=Jean|editor1-last=Raven |year=2008|publisher=Royal Fireworks Press|location=Unionville (NY)|isbn=978-0-89824-356-7|lay-url=http://www.rfwp.com/3567.htm|laydate=6 July 2010|ref=harv}}
* Kaiser, C., Kröckel, J., Bodendorf, F. (2010). [https://web.archive.org/web/20120121230742/http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/HICSS.2010.356 Swarm Intelligence for Analyzing Opinions in Online Communities]. Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1–9.
* {{cite book | ref=harv
| last=Radakov | first=Dmitriĭ Viktorovich
| last=Radakov | first=Dmitriĭ Viktorovich
| last=Radakov | first=Dmitriĭ Viktorovich
| year=1973
| year=1973
1973年
|editor=J. Wiley
|editor=J. Wiley
编辑 j。威利
| title=Schooling in the ecology of fish
| title=Schooling in the ecology of fish
| 题目: 鱼类生态中的群落现象
}}
}}
}}
{{refend}}
== External links ==
{{Library resources box}}
* [http://blogofcollectiveintelligence.com/ Blog of Collective Intelligence]
* [http://themp.org GFIS – Global Futures Intelligence System]
* [http://ciresearchinstitute.org CIRI – the Collective Intelligence Research Institute] – a R&D non-profit organization on collective intelligence
* [http://gccsr.org An application of Collective Intelligence for the Global Climate Change Situation Room] designed and implemented by The Millennium Project in Gimcheon, South Korea in 2009.
* [http://scripts.mit.edu/~cci/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page MIT Handbook of Collective Intelligence]
* [http://www.scn.org/commnet/civic-intelligence.html Cultivating Society's Civic Intelligence] Doug Schuler ''Journal of Society, Information and Communication'', vol 4 No. 2.
* Jennifer H. Watkins (2007). [http://escholarship.org/uc/item/8mg0p0zc Prediction Markets as an Aggregation Mechanism for Collective Intelligence] Los Alamos National Laboratory article on Collective Intelligence
* [[Hideyasu Sasaki]] (2010). [https://web.archive.org/web/20101002143636/http://sites.google.com/site/hsasakilab/Home/ijoci/ijoci-vol-1-no-1 International Journal of Organizational and Collective Intelligence (IJOCI)], vol 1 No. 1.
* Olivier Zara, [https://web.archive.org/web/20060306124022/http://www.axiopole.com/pdf/Managing_collective_intelligence.pdf ''Managing Collective Intelligence, Toward a New Corporate Governance''], Axiopole editions, 2004
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20170925233103/http://collectiveintel.net/ The collective intelligence framework], open-source framework for leveraging collective intelligence
* Raimund Minichbauer (2012). [http://eipcp.net/transversal/0112/minichbauer/en Fragmented Collectives. On the Politics of "Collective Intelligence" in Electronic Networks], transversal 01 12, 'unsettling knowledges'
{{Collective animal behaviour}}
{{Human intelligence topics}}
{{Knowledge management}}
{{Semantic Web}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Collective Intelligence}}
[[Category:Collective intelligence| ]]
[[Category:Artificial intelligence]]
Category:Artificial intelligence
类别: 人工智能
[[Category:Multi-robot systems]]
Category:Multi-robot systems
类别: 多机器人系统
<noinclude>
<small>This page was moved from [[wikipedia:en:Collective intelligence]]. Its edit history can be viewed at [[集体智能/edithistory]]</small></noinclude>
[[Category:待整理页面]]