If you mean it's AGI, then no, definitely not, but then, nothing is. (Whoever was about to stand up and say "how do you know that ChatGPT isn't AGI", don't. You'll thank me in three years that those words are not attached to your name in public.)

If you mean, does it fall into what people would have described as AI before marketers, executives, and other similarly ignorant people started using "AI" to refer specifically to generative models, then yes, it absolutely is.

I favor a model of intelligence where one measures problem-solving capability along multiple axes and defines an N-dimensional shape that describes a hypervolume of 'general' intelligence. One could certainly argue that because this program solves problems that can only meaningfully be measured along one axis that it has too few dimensions to be called intelligence. The trouble with that is software generally works best when specialized for problems with a single axis, so by that definition 'general intelligence' is either unlikely to happen in that space at all or won't be energy efficient if it does.

What would likely have a higher intelligence is a 'cyborg' - which could just be a human accessing this program via conventional means - who adds this program's problem solving capability along one axis to their existing hypervolume of intelligence. So maybe not artificial intelligence, but definitely an artificial intelligence expander.

This seems more like AI than the very recent rebrand of ML. Machine learning can be a sub-system of AI systems but in itself was not thought of as AI for a long time.

It is not a language model, and it doesn't run on a GPU, but it is definitely a mechanical implementation of searching a solution in a space.

Try, test, fail, change parameters, repeat.

The 'AI', to me at least would suggest some kind of intelligence to 'make informed assumptions' at least.. But not sure. Its confusing.