138
个编辑
更改
跳到导航
跳到搜索
第1行：
第1行： − + − {{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]]and animals. − − 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. − − − − − − 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]], [[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." 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. − − 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. 第26行：
第12行： − − − − 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. 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. − − − − 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. Definition, operationalization and statistical methods are derived from ''g''. Similarly as ''g'' is highly interrelated with the concept of [[Intelligence quotient|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. − − 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. − − − − 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. − − 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. − − − − 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). − {{TOC limit|3}}+ − − − − − 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.+ − − 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. − − − − − − 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]]. − − 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. − − − − 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. − − 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. − − − − 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. − − 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. − − − − 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 the game theory and engineering communities. − − 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 the game theory and engineering communities. − + − [[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 Henry Holland|John Holland]].+ − − 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. − − − − − − 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 [[aphid]]s for "milking". − − 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. − − − − [[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 [[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" and [[Teilhard de Chardin]] as a thinker who has developed the philosophical implications of the group mind. − − 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. − − − − 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]]. − − 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. − − − − 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 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. − − 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. − − − − 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. 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. 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. − − 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. + − − [[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. − − 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. − − 罗伯特·戴维·斯蒂尔·维瓦斯Robert David Steele Vivas在《智慧前沿The New Craft of Intelligence》中将所有公民描绘为“情报干事”，描绘了仅利用法律和道德信息，就能够创造出使公共官员和公司经理保持诚信的“公共情报”，从而改变高层的“国家情报”（以前涉及间谍和保密系统）<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>。 − − − − [[文件:多智能系统协作Stigmergic Collaboration：大规模协作的理论框架.jpg|thumb|多智能系统协作Stigmergic Collaboration：大规模协作的理论框架]] − − 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; − − 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; − − ; 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. − ; 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. − − ; [[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. − − − ; 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. 第195行：
第70行： − + − A new scientific understanding of collective intelligence defines it as a group's general ability to perform a wide range of tasks. 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]]. 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) 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 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. 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'', 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. 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]]. 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. − − 对集体智能最新的科学理解，是将其定义为一个团队执行各种任务的综合能力<ref name=":03">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>。定义，可操作性和统计方法类似于<FONT COLOR=“#32CD32”>G因素(心理测量学，常规个人智力的计量方法)</FONT>。因此，在给定的一组认知任务上的个人表现被用于计量综合认知能力，通过因子分析法算出其<font color=“#32CD32”>智力因子g<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Spearman|first=Charles, E.|date=1904|title="General intelligence," objectively determined and measured|journal=American Journal of Psychology |volume=15 |issue=2|pages=201–293|doi=10.2307/1412107|jstor=1412107}}</ref></font>。同理，g用于表达认知任务与个体之间的表现差异，集体智能研究的目的是为群体“c因子”（也称为“集体智力因子”（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. |name-list-style=amp |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>）找到一个类似的智力因子，以显示任务表现上群体间的差异。然后，将集体智力得分用于预测该组将来执行其他类似任务的表现。然而，目前任务的内容设置还局限在针对小团体的心智任务<ref name=":04">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>，尽管一开始的概念是希望能涉及的更广泛，比如说从家庭到公司甚至整个城市的任何团体或人群<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal|author1=Woolley, A. |author2= Malone, T. |name-list-style=amp |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}}</ref>。由于个体的<font color=“#ff8000”> g因子</font>得分与全方位IQ得分密切相关，并且后者还可以恰当的估计<font color=“#ff8000”> g因子<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|date=1992|title=Understanding g in terms of information processing|journal=Educational Psychology Review |volume=4 |issue=3|pages=271–308|doi=10.1007/bf01417874|s2cid=54739564}}</ref><ref name=":22">{{Cite book|title=The g factor: The science of mental ability.|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|publisher=Praeger|year=1998|location=Westport, CT}}</ref></font>，因此集体智能测量的结果同样可以被视为是一个群体的智力指标或商（Group-IQ），类似于个人智商（IQ），虽然该分数本身不是商。 − − − − 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, such as a composition out of several equally important but independent factors as found in [[Big Five personality traits|individual personality research]]. − − 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, such as a composition out of several equally important but independent factors as found in [[Big Five personality traits|individual personality research]]. − − − − − − 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''. − − 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. + − + − − === Causes 原因 === − − 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). − − 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). − − 个体智力受到遗传与环境影响<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Briley|first1=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|last1=Deary|first1=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>。类似地，集体智力的研究目的是探索为什么某些群体比其他群体表现地更聪明，假设因子c与群体中单个成员的智力适度相关<ref name=":06">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>。根据Woolley等人的结果，团队凝聚力，动机或满意度都与因子c无关。但是，他们声称发现了三个非常重要的相关因素：成员发表意见的次数，成员社会敏感度平均值和女性比例。这三者对因子c具有相似的预测能力，但目前只有社会敏感度具有统计学意义（b = 0.33，P = 0.05）<ref name=":07">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>。 − − − − 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. − − 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. − − − − 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. − − 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. − − − − The proportion of females as a predictor of ''c'' was largely mediated by social sensitivity ([[Sobel test|Sobel]] z = 1.93, P= 0.03) which is in vein with previous research showing that women score higher on social sensitivity tests. While a [[Mediation (statistics)|mediation]], statistically speaking, clarifies the mechanism underlying the relationship between a dependent and an independent variable,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.[46] However, she relativizes this stating that the actual important thing is the high social sensitivity of group members.[46] − − 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. 第848行：
第680行： − − {{Div col|colwidth=40em}} − − 第927行：
第755行： − + − − − 第963行：
第788行： − − 第1,006行：
第829行： − + − {{reflist|30em}} − − 第1,133行：
第953行： − <br>
无编辑摘要
此词条由[[用户:Jie|Jie]]翻译
此词条由[[用户:Jie|Jie]]翻译
本词条由[[用户:Qige96|Ricky]]审校（没啥好审的，翻译牛逼！）
本词条由[[用户:Qige96|Ricky]]审校
[[文件:CI types1s 2.jpg|400px|thumb|right|集体智能的类型]]
[[文件:CI types1s 2.jpg|400px|thumb|right|集体智能的类型]]
<font color="#ff8000">集体智能 Collective intelligence</font>（简称CI,或称为<font color="#ff8000"> 集体智力</font>，<font color="#ff8000"> 集体智慧</font>等）指的是共享的或群体的智慧，源于众多个体的协作、共同努力和竞争，最终在决策中达到共识。其术语经常出现在社会生物学，政治科学以及大规模同行评议和众包应用中。它可能牵涉到<font color="#ff8000"> 大众共识</font>，<font color="#ff8000"> 社会资本</font>和形式体系，例如<font color="#ff8000"> 投票系统</font>，社交媒体和其他方式的群众活动。另一个概念是<font color="#ff8000"> 群体智商 Collective IQ</font>，它是用来度量集体智能的，尽管它通常会与集体智能一词互换使用。集体智能也可以在细菌和动物群体中形成。
<font color="#ff8000"> 集体智能 Collective intelligence</font>（简称CI,或称为<font color="#ff8000"> 集体智力</font>，<font color="#ff8000"> 集体智慧</font>等）指的是共享的或群体的智慧，源于众多个体的协作、共同努力和竞争，最终在决策中达到共识。其术语经常出现在社会生物学，政治科学以及大规模同行评议和众包应用中。它可能牵涉到<font color="#ff8000"> 大众共识</font>，<font color="#ff8000"> 社会资本</font>和形式体系，例如<font color="#ff8000"> 投票系统</font>，社交媒体和其他方式的群众活动。另一个概念是<font color="#ff8000"> 群体智商 Collective IQ</font>，它是用来度量集体智能的，尽管它通常会与集体智能一词互换使用。集体智能也可以在细菌和动物群体中形成。
以下三个要素在经过<font color="#ff8000"> 协同</font>作用后，产生的增效现象被理解为一种<font color="#ff8000"> 涌现特性</font>：
以下三个要素在经过<font color="#ff8000"> 协同</font>作用后，产生的增效现象被理解为一种<font color="#ff8000"> 涌现特性</font>：
# 专家（具有最新见解且公认权威的专家）
# 专家（具有最新见解且公认权威的专家）
通过不断从反馈中学习并产生实时性知识，这三个要素的<font color="#ff8000"> 协同</font>增效作用比它们单独采取行动来说，做出的决策会更好<ref name="Suran2020">{{cite journal |last1=Suran |first1=Shweta |last2=Pattanaik |first2=Vishwajeet |last3=Draheim |first3=Dirk |title=Frameworks for Collective Intelligence: A Systematic Literature Review |journal=ACM Computing Surveys |date=5 February 2020 |volume=53 |issue=1 |pages=14:1–14:36 |doi=10.1145/3368986|s2cid=211040820 }}</ref><ref>Glenn, Jerome C. Collective Intelligence – One of the Next Big Things, Futura 4/2009, Finnish Society for Futures Studies, Helsinki, Finland</ref>；或更狭义地讲，这是人与信息处理方式之间的一种<font color="#ff8000">涌现特性<ref>Glenn, Jerome C. Chapter 5, 2008 State of the Future. The Millennium Project, Washington, DC 2008</ref></font>。诺曼·李·约翰逊 Norman Lee Johnson将这种集体智能的概念称为<font color="#ff8000"> 共生智能 symbiotic intelligence<ref>Norman Lee Johnson, [http://CollectiveScience.com Collective Science site] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111006221737/http://collectivescience.com/ |date=6 October 2011 }}</ref></font>。该概念用于社会学，商业，计算机科学和大众传播学：当然，它也出现在科幻小说中。皮埃尔·列维 Pierre Lévy给出了集体智能另一个定义：“它是一种普遍的分布式智慧，通过不断增强和实时合作来有效地调动技能。我将在此定义中添加以下必不可少的特征：集体智能的基本原则和目标是相互认可并实现个体自身的丰富，而不是什么拜物主义或者原质主义的邪教团体。”<ref>{{Cite book|last=Levy|first=Pierre|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yPNGswEACAAJ|title=Collective Intelligence|date=1999-12-10|publisher=Basic Books|isbn=978-0-7382-0261-7|pages=14|language=en|oclc=249995946}}</ref>根据研究人员ierre Lévy和德里克·德·科克霍夫Derrick de Kerckhove的说法，它指的是网络<font color="#ff8000"> ICTs</font>（信息通信技术Information communication technologies）通过扩大人类互动范围来增强社会知识群体的能力。一个更广泛的定义是由 Geoff Mulgan 在一系列讲座和报告中提出的，从2006年开始，在阿德莱德系列讲座‘关于集体智慧和 http://www.thinkers.sa.gov.au/images/mulgan_final_report.pdf 的集体智慧’和在《 Big Mind Mulgan，Geoff Big Mind: How Collective Intelligence can Change our World 》一书中提出了一个分析任何思维系统的框架，包括人类和机器智能，在功能元素方面(观察，预测，创造力，判断等)。)、学习循环和组织形式。其目的是提供一种方法来诊断和改善一个城市、商业、非政府组织或议会的集体智慧。
通过不断从反馈中学习并产生实时性知识，这三个要素的<font color="#ff8000"> 协同</font>增效作用比它们单独采取行动来说，做出的决策会更好<ref name="Suran2020">{{cite journal |last1=Suran |first1=Shweta |last2=Pattanaik |first2=Vishwajeet |last3=Draheim |first3=Dirk |title=Frameworks for Collective Intelligence: A Systematic Literature Review |journal=ACM Computing Surveys |date=5 February 2020 |volume=53 |issue=1 |pages=14:1–14:36 |doi=10.1145/3368986|s2cid=211040820 }}</ref><ref>Glenn, Jerome C. Collective Intelligence – One of the Next Big Things, Futura 4/2009, Finnish Society for Futures Studies, Helsinki, Finland</ref>；或更狭义地讲，这是人与信息处理方式之间的一种<font color="#ff8000">涌现特性<ref>Glenn, Jerome C. Chapter 5, 2008 State of the Future. The Millennium Project, Washington, DC 2008</ref></font>。诺曼·李·约翰逊 Norman Lee Johnson将这种集体智能的概念称为<font color="#ff8000"> 共生智能 symbiotic intelligence<ref>Norman Lee Johnson, [http://CollectiveScience.com Collective Science site] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111006221737/http://collectivescience.com/ |date=6 October 2011 }}</ref></font>。该概念用于社会学，商业，计算机科学和大众传播学：当然，它也出现在科幻小说中。皮埃尔·列维 Pierre Lévy给出了集体智能另一个定义：“它是一种普遍的分布式智慧，通过不断增强和实时合作来有效地调动技能。我将在此定义中添加以下必不可少的特征：集体智能的基本原则和目标是相互认可并实现个体自身的丰富，而不是什么拜物主义或者原质主义的邪教团体。”<ref>{{Cite book|last=Levy|first=Pierre|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yPNGswEACAAJ|title=Collective Intelligence|date=1999-12-10|publisher=Basic Books|isbn=978-0-7382-0261-7|pages=14|language=en|oclc=249995946}}</ref>根据研究人员ierre Lévy和德里克·德·科克霍夫Derrick de Kerckhove的说法，它指的是网络<font color="#ff8000"> ICTs</font>（信息通信技术Information communication technologies）通过扩大人类互动范围来增强社会知识群体的能力。一个更广泛的定义是由 Geoff Mulgan 在一系列讲座和报告中提出的，从2006年开始，在阿德莱德系列讲座‘关于集体智慧和 http://www.thinkers.sa.gov.au/images/mulgan_final_report.pdf 的集体智慧’和在《 Big Mind Mulgan，Geoff Big Mind: How Collective Intelligence can Change our World 》一书中提出了一个分析任何思维系统的框架，包括人类和机器智能，在功能元素方面(观察，预测，创造力，判断等)。)、学习循环和组织形式。其目的是提供一种方法来诊断和改善一个城市、商业、非政府组织或议会的集体智慧。
集体智能极大地促进了知识和权力从个人到集体的转移。埃里克·雷蒙德Eric S. Raymond（1998）和杰西·赫兹JC Herz（2005）认为，相较于一个公司通过内部开发专有软件来创造知识，开源智慧则终将产生更优异的成果（Flew 2008）。媒体理论家亨利·詹金斯Henry Jenkins将集体智能视为与融合文化相关的“媒体力量的替代来源”。他提请人们关注教育，特别是基于传统教育设置之外的知识文化参与方式。Henry Jenkins批评学校提倡的“自主解决问题者和独立学习者”，同时又反对通过集体智能来学习<ref>Jenkins, ''Henry Convergence Culture: Where old and new media collide''. New York: New York University Press, 2006, p. 259</ref>。Pierre Lévy（2007）和Henry Jenkins（2008）也都支持这样的说法，即集体智能对民主化很重要，因为它与以知识为基础的文化相互联系，并通过群体的思想共享来维持，从而有助于更好地理解多元化社会。
集体智能极大地促进了知识和权力从个人到集体的转移。埃里克·雷蒙德Eric S. Raymond（1998）和杰西·赫兹JC Herz（2005）认为，相较于一个公司通过内部开发专有软件来创造知识，开源智慧则终将产生更优异的成果（Flew 2008）。媒体理论家亨利·詹金斯Henry Jenkins将集体智能视为与融合文化相关的“媒体力量的替代来源”。他提请人们关注教育，特别是基于传统教育设置之外的知识文化参与方式。Henry Jenkins批评学校提倡的“自主解决问题者和独立学习者”，同时又反对通过集体智能来学习<ref>Jenkins, ''Henry Convergence Culture: Where old and new media collide''. New York: New York University Press, 2006, p. 259</ref>。Pierre Lévy（2007）和Henry Jenkins（2008）也都支持这样的说法，即集体智能对民主化很重要，因为它与以知识为基础的文化相互联系，并通过群体的思想共享来维持，从而有助于更好地理解多元化社会。
与测试个人智力的<font color=“#ff8000”> g因子</font>相似，对群体智力的最新科学理解主要是提取群体的综合智力因子”c因子”，以表明一个群体执行各种任务的能力<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>。其定义，操作方式和统计方法均同于<font color=“#ff8000”> g因子</font>测试法。同样地，由于g与IQ的概念高度相关<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|date=1992|title=Understanding g in terms of information processing|journal=Educational Psychology Review |volume=4 |issue=3|pages=271–308|doi=10.1007/bf01417874|s2cid=54739564}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite book|title=The g factor: The science of mental ability.|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|publisher=Praeger|year=1998|location=Westport, CT}}</ref>，因此这种群体智力的度量也可以解释为<font color="#ff8000"> 群体的智商（Group-IQ）</font>，即使该分数自身不是商。另外，还研究c值的成因和预测其有效性。
与测试个人智力的<font color=“#ff8000”> g因子</font>相似，对群体智力的最新科学理解主要是提取群体的综合智力因子”c因子”，以表明一个群体执行各种任务的能力<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>。其定义，操作方式和统计方法均同于<font color=“#ff8000”> g因子</font>测试法。同样地，由于g与IQ的概念高度相关<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|date=1992|title=Understanding g in terms of information processing|journal=Educational Psychology Review |volume=4 |issue=3|pages=271–308|doi=10.1007/bf01417874|s2cid=54739564}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite book|title=The g factor: The science of mental ability.|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|publisher=Praeger|year=1998|location=Westport, CT}}</ref>，因此这种群体智力的度量也可以解释为<font color="#ff8000"> 群体的智商（Group-IQ）</font>，即使该分数自身不是商。另外，还研究c值的成因和预测其有效性。
集体智能可用于帮助创建广为人知的平台，包括Google，Wikipedia和政治团体。Google就是主打搜索引擎的例子，它可以看作是由世界各地的人们共同创建数百万个网站的集合。它能够通过彼此共享知识和创造力，来协作并拓展思维与表达。Google团队包含五大关键动力，以创建一个协作良好的系统。它们是：心理安全性，可靠性，架构和清晰度，工作的含义以及工作的影响。他们重新发现集体智能的核心价值其实是确保所有员工都能够表达自己的意见，而不必担心其带来的尴尬。据说Google的团队合作是其成功的主要原因之一，其中包括运用情绪管理和集体智能来确保合作团队能参与任何讨论。Google背后的系统例证了网络与人知识的结合，而不仅仅是人与人知识的结合。
集体智能可用于帮助创建广为人知的平台，包括Google，Wikipedia和政治团体。Google就是主打搜索引擎的例子，它可以看作是由世界各地的人们共同创建数百万个网站的集合。它能够通过彼此共享知识和创造力，来协作并拓展思维与表达。Google团队包含五大关键动力，以创建一个协作良好的系统。它们是：心理安全性，可靠性，架构和清晰度，工作的含义以及工作的影响。他们重新发现集体智能的核心价值其实是确保所有员工都能够表达自己的意见，而不必担心其带来的尴尬。据说Google的团队合作是其成功的主要原因之一，其中包括运用情绪管理和集体智能来确保合作团队能参与任何讨论。Google背后的系统例证了网络与人知识的结合，而不仅仅是人与人知识的结合。
影响集体智能思想的作家包括弗朗西斯·加尔顿Francis Galton，道格拉斯·霍夫斯塔特Douglas Hofstadter（1979），彼得·罗素Peter Russell（1983），汤姆·阿特利Tom Atlee（1993），Pierre Lévy（1994），霍华德·布鲁姆Howard Bloom（1995），弗朗西斯·海里根Francis Heylighen（1995），道格拉斯·恩格巴特Douglas Engelbart，路易·罗森伯格Louis Rosenberg，克里夫·乔斯林Cliff Joslyn，罗恩·丹博Ron Dembo，戈特弗里德·梅耶·克雷斯Gottfried Mayer-Kress（2003）。
影响集体智能思想的作家包括弗朗西斯·加尔顿Francis Galton，道格拉斯·霍夫斯塔特Douglas Hofstadter（1979），彼得·罗素Peter Russell（1983），汤姆·阿特利Tom Atlee（1993），Pierre Lévy（1994），霍华德·布鲁姆Howard Bloom（1995），弗朗西斯·海里根Francis Heylighen（1995），道格拉斯·恩格巴特Douglas Engelbart，路易·罗森伯格Louis Rosenberg，克里夫·乔斯林Cliff Joslyn，罗恩·丹博Ron Dembo，戈特弗里德·梅耶·克雷斯Gottfried Mayer-Kress（2003）。
== 历史==
== History 历史==
[[文件:World Brain HG Wells 1938.jpg|250px|thumb|left|世界脑 H.G. Wells (1936–1938)]]
[[文件:World Brain HG Wells 1938.jpg|250px|thumb|left|世界脑 H.G. Wells (1936–1938)]]
这个概念（尽管没有如此命名）起源于1785年的侯爵·孔多塞Marquis de Condorcet，其<font color="“#ff8000”"> 陪审原理</font>指出，如果一个投票组的每个成员更有可能做出正确的决定，则该组中最高的票数是正确决定的概率会随着该组成员的数量增加而增加（请参考Condorcet's jury theorem<font color="“#ff8000”"> 孔多塞陪审团原理.</font>）。许多理论学家已经解释了亚里士多德 Aristotle在他的著作《政治》中的说法，即“集体盛宴相比较独自晚餐更加美味”，意思是每个人都可以带来各自的菜肴摆在餐桌上.。引申为许多人可能会提供不同的信息片段以产生更好的决策。然而，最近的一项研究表明，这可能不是亚里士多德的原意，而是根据目前我们对团队智能的了解做出的现代解释。
这个概念（尽管没有如此命名）起源于1785年的侯爵·孔多塞Marquis de Condorcet，其<font color=“#ff8000”> 陪审原理</font>指出，如果一个投票组的每个成员更有可能做出正确的决定，则该组中最高的票数是正确决定的概率会随着该组成员的数量增加而增加（请参考Condorcet's jury theorem<font color=“#ff8000”> 孔多塞陪审团原理.<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/books?id=B-6YNnIIlE8C|isbn=978-0691155654}}</ref></font>）。许多理论学家已经解释了亚里士多德 Aristotle在他的著作《政治》中的说法，即“集体盛宴相比较独自晚餐更加美味”，意思是每个人都可以带来各自的菜肴摆在餐桌上.<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|s2cid=154578834}}</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>。引申为许多人可能会提供不同的信息片段以产生更好的决策。然而，最近的一项研究表明<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|s2cid=220724879|url=https://zenodo.org/record/1063691}}</ref>，这可能不是亚里士多德的原意，而是根据目前我们对团队智能的了解做出的现代解释<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>。
一开始昆虫学家威廉·莫顿·惠勒William Morton Wheeler意识到了这一概念（1910），他观察到独立的个体之间可以紧密合作，以至于无法与某单个生物区分开<ref>Wheeler, W. M. (1910). Ants: their structure, development and behavior (Vol. 9). Columbia University Press.</ref>。他在蚂蚁身上看到了这种协作过程，它们就像野兽的细胞一样，他称其为<font color=“#ff8000”> 超有机体</font>。
一开始昆虫学家威廉·莫顿·惠勒William Morton Wheeler意识到了这一概念（1910），他观察到独立的个体之间可以紧密合作，以至于无法与某单个生物区分开<ref>Wheeler, W. M. (1910). Ants: their structure, development and behavior (Vol. 9). Columbia University Press.</ref>。他在蚂蚁身上看到了这种协作过程，它们就像野兽的细胞一样，他称其为<font color=“#ff8000”> 超有机体</font>。
1912年，埃米尔·涂尔干Émile Durkheim将社会定义为人类逻辑思维的唯一来源。他在《宗教生活的基本形式》一书中指出<ref>Émile Durkheim, ''The Elementary Forms of Religious Life'', 1912.</ref>，社会构成了一种更高的智慧，因为它在时空上超越了个人。其他先例还有弗拉基米尔·韦尔纳斯基Vladimir Vernadsky和皮埃尔·泰尔哈德·德·夏尔丁Pierre Teilhard de Chardin的<font color=“#ff8000”> 智能圈</font>概念以及赫伯特·乔治·威尔斯H.G. Wells的“<font color="#ff8000"> 世界脑World brain</font>”概念（另请参见“<font color="#ff8000"> 全球大脑 Global brain“</font>）。Peter Russell，伊丽莎白·萨赫图里斯Elisabet Sahtouris和芭芭拉·马克思·哈伯德Barbara Marx Hubbard（<font color=“#ff8000”> 意识演化</font>一词的发起者）受到了<font color=“#ff8000”> 智能圈</font>的启发，即超自然的，迅速发展的集体智能，相当于地球的大脑信息皮质层。哲学家Pierre Lévy最近对该概念进行了研究<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>。在1962年的一份研究报告中，Douglas Engelbart将集体智能与组织有效性联系起来，并预测说，积极地“增强人类智慧”将在解决群体问题方面产生事半功倍的效果：“以这种增强模式工作的三个人在解决复杂问题上的效率似乎是一个单独工作的人（同等增强幅度）的三倍以上”<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>。1994年，他创造了<font color=“#ff8000”> 群体智商</font>一词来衡量集体智能，以集中精力在商业和社会中寻找显著提高群体智商的机会<ref>Engelbart, Douglas (1994)[https://archive.org/stream/boostingcollecti00drdo#page/n9/mode/2up Boosting Collective IQ] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160702192002/http://www.archive.org/stream/boostingcollecti00drdo#page/n9/mode/2up |date=2 July 2016 }} (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>。
1912年，埃米尔·涂尔干Émile Durkheim将社会定义为人类逻辑思维的唯一来源。他在《宗教生活的基本形式》一书中指出<ref>Émile Durkheim, ''The Elementary Forms of Religious Life'', 1912.</ref>，社会构成了一种更高的智慧，因为它在时空上超越了个人。其他先例还有弗拉基米尔·韦尔纳斯基Vladimir Vernadsky和皮埃尔·泰尔哈德·德·夏尔丁Pierre Teilhard de Chardin的<font color=“#ff8000”> 智能圈</font>概念以及赫伯特·乔治·威尔斯H.G. Wells的“<font color="#ff8000"> 世界脑World brain</font>”概念（另请参见“<font color="#ff8000"> 全球大脑 Global brain“</font>）。Peter Russell，伊丽莎白·萨赫图里斯Elisabet Sahtouris和芭芭拉·马克思·哈伯德Barbara Marx Hubbard（<font color=“#ff8000”> 意识演化</font>一词的发起者）受到了<font color=“#ff8000”> 智能圈</font>的启发，即超自然的，迅速发展的集体智能，相当于地球的大脑信息皮质层。哲学家Pierre Lévy最近对该概念进行了研究<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>。在1962年的一份研究报告中，Douglas Engelbart将集体智能与组织有效性联系起来，并预测说，积极地“增强人类智慧”将在解决群体问题方面产生事半功倍的效果：“以这种增强模式工作的三个人在解决复杂问题上的效率似乎是一个单独工作的人（同等增强幅度）的三倍以上”<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>。1994年，他创造了<font color=“#ff8000”> 群体智商</font>一词来衡量集体智能，以集中精力在商业和社会中寻找显著提高群体智商的机会<ref>Engelbart, Douglas (1994)[https://archive.org/stream/boostingcollecti00drdo#page/n9/mode/2up Boosting Collective IQ] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160702192002/http://www.archive.org/stream/boostingcollecti00drdo#page/n9/mode/2up |date=2 July 2016 }} (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>。
集体智能的概念也构成了当代民主理论的框架，这些理论通常被称为<font color="#ff8000"> 认知民主Epistemic democracy</font>。指的是民众的能力，即通过审议或汇总知识来追踪真相，并依靠这种机制来综合运用集体智能<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/books?id=B-6YNnIIlE8C|isbn=978-0691155654}}</ref>。
集体智能的概念也构成了当代民主理论的框架，这些理论通常被称为<font color="#ff8000"> 认知民主Epistemic democracy</font>。指的是民众的能力，即通过审议或汇总知识来追踪真相，并依靠这种机制来综合运用集体智能<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/books?id=B-6YNnIIlE8C|isbn=978-0691155654}}</ref>。
集体智能在20世纪后期被引入机器学习社区<ref name="Wolpert arXiv:cs/9905004">{{Cite book|last1=Wolpert|first1=David H.|last2=Tumer|first2=Kagan|last3=Frank|first3=Jeremy|date=1999-05-10|chapter=Using Collective Intelligence to Route Internet Traffic|title=Advances in Information Processing Systems |editor1=M. Kearns |editor2=S. Solla |editor3=D. Cohn |publisher=MIT Press|volume=11|arxiv=cs/9905004|bibcode=1999cs........5004W}}</ref>，后被广泛认作为一种方法，即如何设计自利的自适应主体“群落”来满足系统范围内的目标要求<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|doi=10.1613/jair.995|s2cid=15861702|doi-access=free}}</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>。这与有关“奖励设计”的单主体工作有关<ref>{{cite news|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>，并已被博弈论和工程界的许多研究人员所推广<ref>{{cite news|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|access-date=8 January 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190108200817/https://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~jrmarden/files/Learning-Chapter.pdf|archive-date=8 January 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>。
集体智能在20世纪后期被引入机器学习社区<ref name="Wolpert arXiv:cs/9905004">{{Cite book|last1=Wolpert|first1=David H.|last2=Tumer|first2=Kagan|last3=Frank|first3=Jeremy|date=1999-05-10|chapter=Using Collective Intelligence to Route Internet Traffic|title=Advances in Information Processing Systems |editor1=M. Kearns |editor2=S. Solla |editor3=D. Cohn |publisher=MIT Press|volume=11|arxiv=cs/9905004|bibcode=1999cs........5004W}}</ref>，后被广泛认作为一种方法，即如何设计自利的自适应主体“群落”来满足系统范围内的目标要求<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|doi=10.1613/jair.995|s2cid=15861702|doi-access=free}}</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>。这与有关“奖励设计”的单主体工作有关<ref>{{cite news|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>，并已被博弈论和工程界的许多研究人员所推广<ref>{{cite news|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|access-date=8 January 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190108200817/https://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~jrmarden/files/Learning-Chapter.pdf|archive-date=8 January 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>。
== Dimensions 维度==
== 维度==
[[文件:Complex adaptive system.gif|thumb|复杂自适应系统模型l]]
[[文件:Complex adaptive system.gif|thumb|复杂自适应系统模型l]]
Howard Bloom曾讨论过大众行为（从夸克到细菌，植物，动物和人类社会的群体行为）。他强调说，生物适应性使得地球上大多数生物已经变成了所谓的“学习机器”。1986年，Bloom将<font color="#ff8000"> 细胞凋亡Apoptosis</font>，<font color="#ff8000"> 并行分布处理Parallel distributed processing</font>，<font color="#ff8000"> 群体选择Group selection</font>和<font color="#ff8000"> 超有机体Superorganism</font>的概念结合在一起，产生了关于集体智能如何运作的理论。后来，他展示了如何用计算机生成的<font color="#ff8000"> 复杂自适应系统Complex adaptive systems</font>和<font color="#ff8000"> 遗传算法Genetic algorithms</font>（ 由约翰·霍兰德John Holland所开创的概念）来解释竞争性细菌群落和人类社会的集体智能。
Howard Bloom曾讨论过大众行为（从夸克到细菌，植物，动物和人类社会的群体行为）。他强调说，生物适应性使得地球上大多数生物已经变成了所谓的“学习机器”。1986年，Bloom将<font color="#ff8000"> 细胞凋亡Apoptosis</font>，<font color="#ff8000"> 并行分布处理Parallel distributed processing</font>，<font color="#ff8000"> 群体选择Group selection</font>和<font color="#ff8000"> 超有机体Superorganism</font>的概念结合在一起，产生了关于集体智能如何运作的理论<ref>Howard Bloom, ''The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition into the Forces of History'', 1995</ref>。后来，他展示了如何用计算机生成的<font color="#ff8000"> 复杂自适应系统Complex adaptive systems</font>和<font color="#ff8000"> 遗传算法Genetic algorithms</font>（ 由约翰·霍兰德John Holland所开创的概念）来解释竞争性细菌群落和人类社会的集体智能<ref name="bloom2000">Howard Bloom, ''Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century'', 2000</ref>。
Bloom追溯了10亿年前我们细菌祖先集体智能的演变过程，并展现出自生命开始以来多物种智慧是如何发挥作用的<ref name="bloom20002">Howard Bloom, ''Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century'', 2000</ref>。类似蚂蚁社会在技术层面上，表现出了比人类社群以外的任何动物更多的智慧。它们合作饲养牲畜，例如“挤奶”的蚜虫<ref name="bloom20003">Howard Bloom, ''Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century'', 2000</ref>。切叶蚁负责护理真菌，并用叶子喂食真菌<ref name="bloom20004">Howard Bloom, ''Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century'', 2000</ref>。
Bloom追溯了10亿年前我们细菌祖先集体智能的演变过程，并展现出自生命开始以来多物种智慧是如何发挥作用的<ref name="bloom20002">Howard Bloom, ''Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century'', 2000</ref>。类似蚂蚁社会在技术层面上，表现出了比人类社群以外的任何动物更多的智慧。它们合作饲养牲畜，例如“挤奶”的蚜虫<ref name="bloom20003">Howard Bloom, ''Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century'', 2000</ref>。切叶蚁负责护理真菌，并用叶子喂食真菌<ref name="bloom20004">Howard Bloom, ''Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind from the Big Bang to the 21st Century'', 2000</ref>。
大卫·斯科宾纳 David Skrbina 引用了<font color="#ff8000"> 群体心智（Group mind）</font>的概念<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>，该概念源自柏拉图的<font color="#ff8000"> 泛心论 Panpsychism</font>（即思想或意识无所不在，并存在于所有事物中）。他进一步发展了托马斯·霍布斯Thomas Hobbes在<font color=“#ff8000”> 利维坦</font>中表达的“群体意识 collective consciousness”的概念<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Er3lCAAAQBAJ&q=david+skrbina+durkheim&pg=PP1|title=Authenticity, Autonomy and Multiculturalism|last=Levey|first=Geoffrey Brahm|date=2015-05-01|publisher=Routledge|isbn=9781317535928}}</ref>，以及费希纳关于人类集体意识的论点。他认为Durkheim是“集体意识”最著名的拥护者，并且认为Teilhard de Chardin作为思想家，曾提出了<font color="#ff8000"> 群体心智（Group mind）</font>的哲学含义<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>。
大卫·斯科宾纳 David Skrbina 引用了<font color="#ff8000"> 群体心智（Group mind）</font>的概念<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>，该概念源自柏拉图的<font color="#ff8000"> 泛心论 Panpsychism</font>（即思想或意识无所不在，并存在于所有事物中）。他进一步发展了托马斯·霍布斯Thomas Hobbes在<font color=“#ff8000”> 利维坦</font>中表达的“群体意识 collective consciousness”的概念<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Er3lCAAAQBAJ&q=david+skrbina+durkheim&pg=PP1|title=Authenticity, Autonomy and Multiculturalism|last=Levey|first=Geoffrey Brahm|date=2015-05-01|publisher=Routledge|isbn=9781317535928}}</ref>，以及费希纳关于人类集体意识的论点。他认为Durkheim是“集体意识”最著名的拥护者，并且认为Teilhard de Chardin作为思想家，曾提出了<font color="#ff8000"> 群体心智（Group mind）</font>的哲学含义<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>。
Tom Atlee则主要关注人类，以及如何提升Howard Bloom所说的<font color=“#ff8000”> 群体智商</font>。Atlee认为，可以鼓励集体智能去“克服‘群体思维'和个人的认知偏见，以使集体在一个过程中进行合作，同时产生更高的智力表现。”乔治·珀尔George Pór将集体智能现象定义为一种能力，即“人类社区通过差异化，融合，竞争和协作等创新机制，向更高层次复杂性协调发展”<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和Pór指出“集体智能还涉及实现<font color="#32CD32">注意力集中</font>和度量标准的统一，从而提供适当的行动阈值”<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|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=11 December 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>。 <font color="#32CD32">他们的方法植根于科学共同体的隐喻<ref name=":202">{{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|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=11 December 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></font>。
Tom Atlee则主要关注人类，以及如何提升Howard Bloom所说的<font color=“#ff8000”> 群体智商</font>。Atlee认为，可以鼓励集体智能去“克服‘群体思维'和个人的认知偏见，以使集体在一个过程中进行合作，同时产生更高的智力表现。”乔治·珀尔George Pór将集体智能现象定义为一种能力，即“人类社区通过差异化，融合，竞争和协作等创新机制，向更高层次复杂性协调发展”<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和Pór指出“集体智能还涉及实现<font color="#32CD32">注意力集中</font>和度量标准的统一，从而提供适当的行动阈值”<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|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=11 December 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>。 <font color="#32CD32">他们的方法植根于科学共同体的隐喻<ref name=":202">{{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|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=11 December 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></font>。
术语<font color="#ff8000"> 团体智慧Collective intelligence</font>有时可以与<font color="#ff8000"> 集体智能Collective intelligence</font>一词互换使用。安妮塔·伍利Anita Woolley认为集体智能，可以衡量集体智慧和创造力<ref name=":02">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>。即集体智能的度量能涵盖群体的广泛特征，主要包括群体组成和群体互动<ref name=":11">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=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|s2cid=146673541}}</ref>。导致群体中集体智能水平提高的组成特征包括：群体中女性人数增加以及群体内多样性增加等<ref name=":112">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=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|s2cid=146673541}}</ref>。
术语<font color="#ff8000"> 团体智慧Collective intelligence</font>有时可以与<font color="#ff8000"> 集体智能Collective intelligence</font>一词互换使用。安妮塔·伍利Anita Woolley认为集体智能，可以衡量集体智慧和创造力<ref name=":02">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>。即集体智能的度量能涵盖群体的广泛特征，主要包括群体组成和群体互动<ref name=":11">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=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|s2cid=146673541}}</ref>。导致群体中集体智能水平提高的组成特征包括：群体中女性人数增加以及群体内多样性增加等<ref name=":112">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=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|s2cid=146673541}}</ref>。
Atlee和Pór还认为，集体智能领域应首先被视为是全体人类的事业。尽管群体理论和人工智能可以提供一些帮助，但是当我们在这个巨大的公司内协作时，为了共同利益，观念模式、分享意愿，以及对分布式智能的开明尤为重要<ref name=":203">{{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|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=11 December 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>。尊重集体智能的个体对自己的能力充满信心，并承认整体确实大于任何单个部分的总和<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|s2cid=7575575|url=http://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/export/DL/221423.pdf|doi-access=free}}</ref>。最大化集体智能取决于组织接受和发展“黄金建议”的能力，即任何成员都可能提供有用的信息<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>。然而，若将输入限制为少数几个人，或过滤掉潜在的“黄金建议”，团体思考通常阻碍集体智能的发展和实施<ref name=":204">{{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|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=11 December 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>。
Atlee和Pór还认为，集体智能领域应首先被视为是全体人类的事业。尽管群体理论和人工智能可以提供一些帮助，但是当我们在这个巨大的公司内协作时，为了共同利益，观念模式、分享意愿，以及对分布式智能的开明尤为重要<ref name=":203">{{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|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=11 December 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>。尊重集体智能的个体对自己的能力充满信心，并承认整体确实大于任何单个部分的总和<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|s2cid=7575575|url=http://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/export/DL/221423.pdf|doi-access=free}}</ref>。最大化集体智能取决于组织接受和发展“黄金建议”的能力，即任何成员都可能提供有用的信息<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>。然而，若将输入限制为少数几个人，或过滤掉潜在的“黄金建议”，团体思考通常阻碍集体智能的发展和实施<ref name=":204">{{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|website=Community Intelligence|publisher=CommunityIntelligence. Ltd|access-date=11 December 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>。
罗伯特·戴维·斯蒂尔·维瓦斯Robert David Steele Vivas在《智慧前沿The New Craft of Intelligence》中将所有公民描绘为“情报干事”，描绘了仅利用法律和道德信息，就能够创造出使公共官员和公司经理保持诚信的“公共情报”，从而改变高层的“国家情报”（以前涉及间谍和保密系统）<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>。[[文件:多智能系统协作Stigmergic Collaboration：大规模协作的理论框架.jpg|thumb|多智能系统协作Stigmergic Collaboration：大规模协作的理论框架]]
根据唐·塔普斯科特Don Tapscott和安东尼·威廉姆斯Anthony D. Williams的说法，集体智能就是大规模协作。为了使这个概念成立，需要满足以下四个原则<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] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111110041604/http://books.google.com/books?id=DVomiOeBg_YC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false |date=10 November 2011 }}'', USA: Penguin Group</ref>：
根据唐·塔普斯科特Don Tapscott和安东尼·威廉姆斯Anthony D. Williams的说法，集体智能就是大规模协作。为了使这个概念成立，需要满足以下四个原则<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] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111110041604/http://books.google.com/books?id=DVomiOeBg_YC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=%22collective%20intelligence%22&f=false |date=10 November 2011 }}'', USA: Penguin Group</ref>：
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.
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'''<blockquote>共享想法和知识产权：尽管这些资源为竞争者提供了优势，但允许其他人共享想法可以带来更多好处，并通过协作获得重大改进和审查。</blockquote>
'''开放性'''<blockquote>共享想法和知识产权：尽管这些资源为竞争者提供了优势，但允许其他人共享想法可以带来更多好处，并通过协作获得重大改进和审查。</blockquote>
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.
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.
<font color=“#32CD32”>'''对等性'''</font><blockquote><font color="“#ff8000”"> 横向组织</font>具有和Linux程序一样的“开放性”，用户在被允许的情况下，可以自由修改和开发该程序。这种<font color="“#32CD32”">对等性</font>的成功是因为它鼓励自组织形式，这种形式的生产方式比某些任务的分层管理更有效。</blockquote>
<font color=“#32CD32”>'''对等性'''</font><blockquote><font color="“#ff8000”"> 横向组织</font>具有和Linux程序一样的“开放性”，用户在被允许的情况下，可以自由修改和开发该程序。这种<font color="“#32CD32”">对等性</font>的成功是因为它鼓励自组织形式，这种形式的生产方式比某些任务的分层管理更有效。</blockquote>
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.
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.
'''共享'''<blockquote>一些公司已经开始分享他们的想法，但是同时又对其部分想法保持一定程度的控制，例如潜在的和关键的专利权。限制所有知识产权会失去一些机会，而共享则会扩大市场并更快地推出产品。</blockquote>
'''共享'''<blockquote>一些公司已经开始分享他们的想法，但是同时又对其部分想法保持一定程度的控制，例如潜在的和关键的专利权。限制所有知识产权会失去一些机会，而共享则会扩大市场并更快地推出产品。</blockquote>
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.
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'''<blockquote>通信技术的进步以较低的间接成本促使了全球公司的兴起。互联网遍布全球，因此一家全球一体化的公司打破了地域限制，他们可以访问任何新市场，新思想和新技术。</blockquote>
'''全球行动'''<blockquote>通信技术的进步以较低的间接成本促使了全球公司的兴起。互联网遍布全球，因此一家全球一体化的公司打破了地域限制，他们可以访问任何新市场，新思想和新技术。</blockquote>
== Collective intelligence factor ''c'' 集体智力因子c ==
== 集体智力因子c ==
[[文件:陡坡图显示了伍利等人（2010）的两项初始研究成果，其中包括第一因素的可释方差百分比。.png|缩略图|右|陡坡图显示了伍利等人（2010）的两项初始研究成果，其中包括第一因素的可释方差百分比。]]
[[文件:陡坡图显示了伍利等人（2010）的两项初始研究成果，其中包括第一因素的可释方差百分比。.png|缩略图|右|陡坡图显示了伍利等人（2010）的两项初始研究成果，其中包括第一因素的可释方差百分比。]]
对集体智能最新的科学理解，是将其定义为一个团队执行各种任务的综合能力。定义，可操作性和统计方法类似于<FONT color="“#32CD32”">G因素(心理测量学，常规个人智力的计量方法)</FONT>。因此，在给定的一组认知任务上的个人表现被用于计量综合认知能力，通过因子分析法算出其<font color="“#32CD32”">智力因子g</font>。同理，g用于表达认知任务与个体之间的表现差异，集体智能研究的目的是为群体“c因子”（也称为“集体智力因子”（CI））找到一个类似的智力因子，以显示任务表现上群体间的差异。然后，将集体智力得分用于预测该组将来执行其他类似任务的表现。然而，目前任务的内容设置还局限在针对小团体的心智任务，尽管一开始的概念是希望能涉及的更广泛，比如说从家庭到公司甚至整个城市的任何团体或人群。由于个体的<font color="“#ff8000”"> g因子</font>得分与全方位IQ得分密切相关，并且后者还可以恰当的估计<font color="“#ff8000”"> g因子</font>，因此集体智能测量的结果同样可以被视为是一个群体的智力指标或商（Group-IQ），类似于个人智商（IQ），虽然该分数本身不是商。
从数学上讲，c和g都是变量，假设不同团队或个人在不同任务（但相似）中的表现具有可比性,这两个变量均描述了该团队或个人在不同任务之间的正相关性<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. |name-list-style=amp |publisher=Guilford|year=2005|location=New York, NY|pages=23–38}}</ref>。<font color="“#32CD32”">因此，c表示的是团队之间的差异，在给定相关人口设置的其他组相比，它仅被视为该组在c因子上的设置结果<ref name=":23">{{Cite book|title=The g factor: The science of mental ability.|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|publisher=Praeger|year=1998|location=Westport, CT}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=van der Maas|first1=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>。g</font><font color="“#32CD32”">需要注意的是，该概念与竞争假设（包括其他可以解释群体智能的相关结构）形成对比<ref name=":05">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>，例如由个体人格研究中发现的一些同样重要但相互独立的因素组合<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|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190421014207/https://webs.wofford.edu/steinmetzkr/teaching/Psy150/Lecture%20PDFs/FiveFactorModel.pdf|archive-date=21 April 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>。</font>
从数学上讲，c和g都是变量，假设不同团队或个人在不同任务（但相似）中的表现具有可比性,这两个变量均描述了该团队或个人在不同任务之间的正相关性<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. |name-list-style=amp |publisher=Guilford|year=2005|location=New York, NY|pages=23–38}}</ref>。<font color="“#32CD32”">因此，c表示的是团队之间的差异，在给定相关人口设置的其他组相比，它仅被视为该组在c因子上的设置结果<ref name=":23">{{Cite book|title=The g factor: The science of mental ability.|last=Jensen|first=Arthur, R.|publisher=Praeger|year=1998|location=Westport, CT}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=van der Maas|first1=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>。g</font><font color="“#32CD32”">需要注意的是，该概念与竞争假设（包括其他可以解释群体智能的相关结构）形成对比<ref name=":05">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>，例如由个体人格研究中发现的一些同样重要但相互独立的因素组合<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|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190421014207/https://webs.wofford.edu/steinmetzkr/teaching/Psy150/Lecture%20PDFs/FiveFactorModel.pdf|archive-date=21 April 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>。</font>
此外，这一科学思想还旨在探讨影响集体智能的原因，例如小组规模，协作工具或小组成员的人际交往能力。例如，麻省理工学院的集体智能中心宣布检测“集体智能的基因组”是其主要目标之一，旨在建立一种分类法，可以组织构建模块或基因组，并对其进行重组，以利用群体的智力<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>。
此外，这一科学思想还旨在探讨影响集体智能的原因，例如小组规模，协作工具或小组成员的人际交往能力。例如，麻省理工学院的集体智能中心宣布检测“集体智能的基因组”是其主要目标之一，旨在建立一种分类法，可以组织构建模块或基因组，并对其进行重组，以利用群体的智力<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>。
=== 原因 ===
个体智力受到遗传与环境影响。类似地，集体智力的研究目的是探索为什么某些群体比其他群体表现地更聪明，假设因子c与群体中单个成员的智力适度相关。根据Woolley等人的结果，团队凝聚力，动机或满意度都与因子c无关。但是，他们声称发现了三个非常重要的相关因素：成员发表意见的次数，成员社会敏感度平均值和女性比例。这三者对因子c具有相似的预测能力，但目前只有社会敏感度具有统计学意义（b = 0.33，P = 0.05）。
成员发表意见的次数表明“由少数人主导的群体，其集体智力不及那些对话轮流分配更为平均的群体。”<ref name=":42">{{Cite journal|author1=Engel, D. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Jing, L. X. |author4=Chabris, C. F. |author5= Malone, T. W. |name-list-style=amp |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>因此，为多个团队成员提供发言的机会可以让团队更加聪明<ref name=":07" />。
成员发表意见的次数表明“由少数人主导的群体，其集体智力不及那些对话轮流分配更为平均的群体。”<ref name=":42">{{Cite journal|author1=Engel, D. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Jing, L. X. |author4=Chabris, C. F. |author5= Malone, T. W. |name-list-style=amp |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>因此，为多个团队成员提供发言的机会可以让团队更加聪明<ref name=":07" />。
<font color="#32CD32">小组成员的社交敏感度通过“<font color="#ff8000"> 眼神阅读测试Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test</font>”<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|journal=Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry |volume=42 |issue=2|pages=241–251|doi=10.1017/s0021963001006643|pmid=11280420}}</ref>（RME）并与c关联（0.26）<ref name=":08">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>或<font color=“#ff8000”> 读心术</font>进行测量。这里要求参与者检测图片中呈现的其他人眼中表达的思维或感觉，并以选择题形式进行评估。该测试旨在衡量人们的<font color="#ff8000"> 心智理论Theory of mind（ToM）</font>，也称为“心理化”<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|s2cid=7212563}}</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 | s2cid = 14955234}} [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|last1=Premack|first1=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>或“思想阅读”<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Heyes|first1=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|s2cid=3139981}}</ref>，指的是感受他人心理状态的能力（例如信念，欲望或意图），当他们的信念，欲望，意图或观点与自己有所不同时，能在多大程度上理解他人。RME是针对成人的ToM测试，显示出足够的重测信度，并不断将对照组与患有功能性自闭症或阿斯伯格综合症<ref name=":62">{{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|journal=Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry |volume=42 |issue=2|pages=241–251|doi=10.1017/s0021963001006643|pmid=11280420}}</ref>的个体区分开来。它是成人ToM最广泛接受和验证良好的测试之一<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Pinkham|first1=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= |journal=Schizophrenia Bulletin|volume=40|issue=4|pages=813–823|doi=10.1093/schbul/sbt081|pmc=4059426|pmid=23728248|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161101212140/http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/4/813|archive-date=1 November 2016|url-status=live}}</ref>。在更宽泛的情商概念中，ToM可被视为技能的相关子集<ref name=":43">{{Cite journal|author1=Engel, D. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Jing, L. X. |author4=Chabris, C. F. |author5= Malone, T. W. |name-list-style=amp |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><ref name="Yip 48–55">{{Cite journal|last1=Yip|first1=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|s2cid=33438475}}</ref>。</font>
<font color="#32CD32">小组成员的社交敏感度通过“<font color="#ff8000"> 眼神阅读测试Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test</font>”<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|journal=Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry |volume=42 |issue=2|pages=241–251|doi=10.1017/s0021963001006643|pmid=11280420}}</ref>（RME）并与c关联（0.26）<ref name=":08">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>或<font color=“#ff8000”> 读心术</font>进行测量。这里要求参与者检测图片中呈现的其他人眼中表达的思维或感觉，并以选择题形式进行评估。该测试旨在衡量人们的<font color="#ff8000"> 心智理论Theory of mind（ToM）</font>，也称为“心理化”<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|s2cid=7212563}}</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 | s2cid = 14955234}} [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|last1=Premack|first1=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>或“思想阅读”<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Heyes|first1=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|s2cid=3139981}}</ref>，指的是感受他人心理状态的能力（例如信念，欲望或意图），当他们的信念，欲望，意图或观点与自己有所不同时，能在多大程度上理解他人。RME是针对成人的ToM测试，显示出足够的重测信度，并不断将对照组与患有功能性自闭症或阿斯伯格综合症<ref name=":62">{{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|journal=Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry |volume=42 |issue=2|pages=241–251|doi=10.1017/s0021963001006643|pmid=11280420}}</ref>的个体区分开来。它是成人ToM最广泛接受和验证良好的测试之一<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Pinkham|first1=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= |journal=Schizophrenia Bulletin|volume=40|issue=4|pages=813–823|doi=10.1093/schbul/sbt081|pmc=4059426|pmid=23728248|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161101212140/http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/4/813|archive-date=1 November 2016|url-status=live}}</ref>。在更宽泛的情商概念中，ToM可被视为技能的相关子集<ref name=":43">{{Cite journal|author1=Engel, D. |author2=Woolley, A. W. |author3=Jing, L. X. |author4=Chabris, C. F. |author5= Malone, T. W. |name-list-style=amp |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><ref name="Yip 48–55">{{Cite journal|last1=Yip|first1=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|s2cid=33438475}}</ref>。</font>
女性占比作为因子c的预测因素主要是通过社会敏感性<font color=“#32CD32”>介导</font>（Sobel z = 1.93，P = 0.03）<ref name=":09">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>，这与之前的研究结果相符，即女性在社会敏感性测试中得分更高<ref name=":63">{{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|journal=Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry |volume=42 |issue=2|pages=241–251|doi=10.1017/s0021963001006643|pmid=11280420}}</ref>。从统计学上讲，<font color=“#32CD32”>介导</font>，从统计学上讲，澄清了因变量和自变量之间关系的基本机制<ref>{{Cite book|title=Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis|last=MacKinnon, D. P.|publisher=Erlbaum|year=2008|location=New York, NY}}</ref>。伍利在接受《哈佛商业评论》采访时曾表示这个发现说明了女性群体比男性群体更聪明。但是，她也就这个结论<font color=“#32CD32”>做了相对化的陈述</font>，实际上重要的是团体成员的高度社会敏感性<ref name=":72">{{Cite journal|author1=Woolley, A. |author2= Malone, T. |name-list-style=amp |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}}</ref>。
女性占比作为因子c的预测因素主要是通过社会敏感性<font color=“#32CD32”>介导</font>（Sobel z = 1.93，P = 0.03）<ref name=":09">{{Cite journal|last1=Woolley|first1=Anita Williams|last2=Chabris|first2=Christopher F.|last3=Pentland|first3=Alex|last4=Hashmi|first4=Nada|last5=Malone|first5=Thomas W.|s2cid=74579|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}}</ref>，这与之前的研究结果相符，即女性在社会敏感性测试中得分更高<ref name=":63">{{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|journal=Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry |volume=42 |issue=2|pages=241–251|doi=10.1017/s0021963001006643|pmid=11280420}}</ref>。从统计学上讲，<font color=“#32CD32”>介导</font>，从统计学上讲，澄清了因变量和自变量之间关系的基本机制<ref>{{Cite book|title=Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis|last=MacKinnon, D. P.|publisher=Erlbaum|year=2008|location=New York, NY}}</ref>。伍利在接受《哈佛商业评论》采访时曾表示这个发现说明了女性群体比男性群体更聪明。但是，她也就这个结论<font color=“#32CD32”>做了相对化的陈述</font>，实际上重要的是团体成员的高度社会敏感性<ref name=":72">{{Cite journal|author1=Woolley, A. |author2= Malone, T. |name-list-style=amp |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}}</ref>。
== See also 其他参考资料 ==
== See also 其他参考资料 ==
=== Similar concepts and applications 相似概念及应用 ===
=== Similar concepts and applications 相似概念及应用 ===
* <font color="#ff8000"> 群众智慧</font>
* <font color="#ff8000"> 群众智慧</font>
* <font color="#ff8000"> 智囊团</font>
* <font color="#ff8000"> 智囊团</font>
* <font color="#ff8000"> 维基百科</font>
* <font color="#ff8000"> 维基百科</font><br />
=== Computation and computer science 计算与计算机科学 ===
=== Computation and computer science 计算与计算机科学 ===
* <font color="#ff8000"> 有机计算</font>
* <font color="#ff8000"> 有机计算</font>
* <font color="#ff8000"> 偏好诱导</font>
* <font color="#ff8000"> 偏好诱导</font>
=== Others 其他 ===
=== Others 其他 ===
== Notes and references 参考文献 ==
== Notes and references 参考文献 ==
<references />
==参考书籍==
==参考书籍==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20170925233103/http://collectiveintel.net/ 集体智能框架], 一个利用集体智能的开源框架
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20170925233103/http://collectiveintel.net/ 集体智能框架], 一个利用集体智能的开源框架
* Raimund Minichbauer (2012). [http://eipcp.net/transversal/0112/minichbauer/en 零散的集体：关于电子网络中的“集体情报”政治]
* Raimund Minichbauer (2012). [http://eipcp.net/transversal/0112/minichbauer/en 零散的集体：关于电子网络中的“集体情报”政治]