I accept there is a correlation between test results and perceived IQ, but since the very definition of intelligence is already controversial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence#Definitions) and tests are probably applied most of the time to measure younger people (career planning etc.), and also the time spent on a single test is very limited, it seems quite conceivable to me that some people might be good at solving more complex real live (common sense: display higher intelligence) while they suck at short tasks. From personal experience (older colleagues) I'd say there is a bias towards this type of people in older people.
BTW: Not exactly the link I was looking for, but same topic: http://www.genetic-programming...
In a final real-world test, Koza chose a filter circuit to solve a design problem that a scholarly engineering journal had deemed too difficult to solve. "The tenth-order elliptic asymmetric bandpass filter was touted as being difficult to design, but we were easily able to solve it," Koza said.
To be fair, Koza did have to double the size of the population used to evolve a bandpass filter-up to 640,000 circuits-thereby multiplying the time it took the computer to evolve a "best" circuit. He had to devise a more extensive fitness measure by which the members of the evolving population were measured against one another. The problem took four days to run, on a 64-CPU parallel processor.
This article is from 1996, so I guess the same algorithm would be even faster now.
Typical reply: What's the most dangerous hazard in SW development? An electrical engineer who gained access to the compiler.
(Both somewhat true, although both with exceptions.)
Neutrinos are into physicists.