7

All theoretical/conceptual questions about statistical learning theory (which is an approach to computational learning theory, developed by Vladimir Vapnik and others, a sub-field of AI) and multi-armed bandit problems/algorithms are on-topic here, but they are also on-topic on Stats SE. Of course, as a mod of Artificial Intelligence Stack Exchange, I would ...


4

I am in favour of this type of question being on-topic here. In particular, it seems that those questions would be at the intersection of "history of AI" (which is on-topic here) and "terminology" (in the sense that you want to know something about terms). We have had some of those question in the past. I remember one that I actually ...


4

The migration of this question to datascience seems really strange to me. Like you said, RL really is pretty much the furthest removed from data science out of all Machine Learning topics, even if it were off-topic on AI for whatever reason, it certainly wouldn't be on-topic on Data Science. To address specifically the question in the title, the I'd say ...


3

I think it depends on the question to some degree. There are some questions that have objective answers via, e.g. surveys of AI researchers. For example, the question of when AI researchers believe "Hard AI" will be created is objectively answerable via this method. I think in general though, questions like the one in that meta-post actually belong ...


3

AI has always been an interdisciplinary field. It therefore should not surprise us that AI.SE's content overlaps with that of other established stacks. I think this is essentially okay. Perhaps as an analogy: The SoftwareEngineering.SE allows programming questions, but not of the same flavor as the StackOverflow main site. If you want to know how to do X in ...


2

Does it really make sense to have all these separate websites (especially, CrossValidated, Data Science and ours), only because of these small differences No, it doesn't make any sense, because whatever people are saying on meta, in practice if you look at the questions posted on AI.SE, over 90% of them are on-topic on CrossValidated and Data Science. This ...


1

I like this. Go ahead and create it. If other users have objections, we can always remove.


1

Absolutely! This is an area where I have formal training, and can legitimate go back to proto-indo-european. (But people typically don't like my analyses b/c they conflict with their own.) If you see any unanswered terminological question, or are interested in the etymology, this is an area of special focus for me in the tech industry and academia, as is ...


1

Those two questions (especially, the second one) are currently off-topic here, as they fall under the general category "software recommendations", which is off-topic here, although there may be some exceptions (e.g. questions related to AGI may not be closed as off-topic, as they may not be on-topic anywhere else and only people that visit our site ...


1

I don't think that this type of question should be made on-topic here, but it may also depend on the question (maybe you can provide a few examples of questions that you have in mind?). The reasons are the site should focus on the theoretical, philosophical, and social aspects of artificial intelligence, but questions asking about funding your project do ...


1

We had done a consensus-based edit last year: What should the AI.SE Site Description be?. (Essentially, a bunch of active users contributed to the thread, and then the edits were made by the active mods. Although I was hoping for more people to participate, we had to go with the input and consensus we had at the time.) I do think this is something that ...


1

We can address futurism (one of the leading drivers of misinformation about AI!) and serve an important function of myth-busting. We deal with social impacts in general, which other related stacks don't address. We can take pyschology/cognitive/neuroscience questions related to AI, which may unwelcome on those stacks. We can treate AI milestones in ...


1

Speaking as a mod, I tend to use a light touch in regard to migrating many of these potentially out-of-scope questions. (Similar to avoiding closing questions by fiat, in all but the most egregious, preferring to follow the will of the community.)


1

I also think every RL question should be on-topic here. Funnily enough, I've been flagging posts for migration to DataScience or CrossValidated according to the help page that defines what is off-topic. But it seems like not everyone really abides by those definitions! I regularly see both implementation and mathematics questions here, related to RL and ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible