Hot answers tagged

16

No, data science and the implementation of artificial intelligence are off-topic. A community manager explicitly said so in the Area 51 discussions for this site. There have been at least two AI sites on SE before, and they've all failed. We need to bring something new to the table, especially in the private beta stage. Once that's over, we can consider ...


10

It's a tricky question. This is NOT a site review, but a personal observation having followed this subject on the network for some time. I think we've done a better job at scoping out something fundamentally more useful as a site. The formative question is whether we have a suitable audience to actually build out this space. But that has to happen here and ...


10

Yes. If we send away everyone asking about philosophy; send everyone asking about feature selection for ANNs to data science and send everyone asking about AI research institutes to chat then there's really not so much left to talk about.


8

I am in the process of writing up the final review of this site. In it, we discuss the difficulties this site is having with scope — mostly around the popular fallacies of what AI actually is. Artificial intelligence is very different from how it’s portrayed in the movies. Whenever a problem becomes solvable by a computer, people start arguing that it ...


7

I would suggest that "programming" and "implementation problems" be explicitly listed as outside the scope of this site. If you see them, I would thoughtfully direct the authors to bring these questions to sites which were explicitly created to handle these "technical" issues. But why can't we have these questions here, too? Many sites have some overlap in ...


7

(Without seeing any actual examples…) These can likely be closed as off topic already. A question sufficiently detailed enough to ask how to defeat a system based in AI will likely no longer be about the subject of AI itself. It would be like asking how to defeat the smart aliens in Galactic Uberblast 2020, or how to remove the T47/a access panel of ...


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 ...


6

I'm sorry, but we can't just go with a simple, blanket statement like "Programming, algorithm, modeling, math, philosophy, and history questions should the off-topic, as they are already on-topic in other SE, such as Stats and Data Science." Why? Because not all questions about "programming, algorithms, modeling...", vis-a-vis Artificial Intelligence, are ...


6

Conceptually speaking, I think it can be useful when a community decides that a rare "big list" question would be so incredibly useful, the community agrees collectively that it is worth the careful curation and on-going upkeep needed to keep it up to date [I'm hoping to build a feature to that effect in the future]. The downside of allowing these questions ...


6

No, that wouldn't happen. A site only becomes eligible as a migration target from other sites' close dialogs after it loses the "beta" label entirely. Also, questions older than 60 days cannot be migrated, even by moderators! The migration you mentioned took place before that rule was instated. Besides, a question being on-topic at the target site is not a ...


6

Definitely not. In some minutes we can see lots of questions asking for specific technical solutions about neural networks and genetic algorithms. I agree with Ben that we need to make this site different and start migrating all these questions to other sites, where there is already an answer to most of them. Why would we want to ask them again? (apart from ...


5

Yes I am sorry to be the one who posts Yes, but as we are in the beta, I want to be straight forward. In addition to that, AI is also on-topic in the CS site. I was the one who raised this in the definition phase. So, a lot of topic which this site aims to cover are already covered in the existing sites.


5

It appears that there is at least one question like this on the site: Are Siri and Cortana AI programs? So I guess it would be okay - as long as you are asking about one (or two) specific thing(s). For asking about in general when something is AI, that has already been asked: What are the minimum requirements to call something AI? The tags... Now that's ...


4

Personally I disagree with the entire premise that "implementation should be off topic". I don't see any point in talking nothing but theory and never talking implementation. My fear is that that will lead us into fringe-land with a lot of sketch posts asking philosophical questions that aren't really helpful to anybody.


4

If a question is off-topic here, just close it with the generic off-topic reason. Our scope isn't set in stone yet, so we want to keep things on our site in case they need to be reopened. If a question owner - not just any user passing by - really wants their question migrated, they can raise a custom mod flag and a CM will take care of it. (Though if the ...


4

I believe questions asked at Stats.SE about artificial intelligence should be on-topic here as well, because: since past 6 years there were only ~73 questions asked about AI, 1/3 of them still unanswered, 40% of question about machine-learning are also unanswered, try scrolling. You may suggest they may lacking of AI experts there, so lets move there. ...


4

@RobertCartaino suggested in this post that: "programming" and "implementation problems" be explicitly listed as outside the scope of this site in order to direct the authors to sites which were explicitly created to handle these "technical" issues. This site failed already two times, because people didn't ask the right ...


4

AI is broader than Machine Learning and Statistical Learning. Yes, the probabilistic / statistical stuff dominates the conversation these days, but AI includes rule based systems, expert systems, symbolic processing, logic programming and other things that would not be on-topic at Cross Validated (or Data Science). We've also been saying that we have more ...


4

I don't think that question would be on-topic, as it has nothing to do with AI. It is more like a current affairs question. A relevant question from the article would be maybe about the limitations/shortcomings behind Skynet's AI program which have caused the disaster


4

I was one of the close voters. First up, the close message you see is the generic off-topic message - we only get one reason under the "off-topic" branch of the close dialogs because we currently have no moderators to create and approve off-topic reasons. Therefore, anything deemed off-topic will get that one message. It's not that your question wasn't ...


4

I think that science without mathematics is usually impossible, science without technology is very difficult (otherwise how to talk about computers for example) but science without programming/implementations is possible. The emphasis would then be on the concepts and/or abstractions. So kind of: pseudocode is okay, real code not algorithms are okay, ...


4

I think that specific question is off topic, and migrated it to Cross Validated. (As I understood it, had two parts--first, does Matlab's learner do bootstrapping, and second, is there a problem with doing bootstrapping twice, neither of which strike me as deeply relevant for AI.) For machine learning questions, I'm mostly looking at whether the question is ...


4

I made the point that the question seems to fit into the "conceptual aspects of AI" covered by this stack, but T.C. countered that Machine Learning questions, in particular, are already quite fractured across several sites. I believe most ML questions are on CV. Then DS got created, which has a huge overlap with CV, and a more trendy name. So one way to ...


4

Neither of those questions, nor this one make any sense to me. I have read and re-read trying to understand what you mean, and I honestly have no idea. I would vote either of those ones as unclear what you are asking, or possible offtopic, and have to also vote this one as unclear. There seems to be a language challenge here. The body of your questions ...


4

At the time I read the question for the first time, this is what I interpreted: Title: "Should" suggests that the question was eliciting opinions of the readers, whether "yes", "no", "doesn't matter", etc., which is opinion-based (off-topic) because there's no one correct answer, or every answers are correct. 1st paragraph: According to your personal ...


3

The question is off-topic, as it's about how to the use of machine learning algorithms. (the other questions on neural nets, their architectures, backpropogation, are also off-topic). Programming, algorithm, modeling, math, philosophy, and history questions should the off-topic, as they are already on-topic in other SE, such as Stats and Data Science. Data ...


3

Clearly, Cross Validated is about statistics - it's even in the URL, stats.stackexchange.com. They're a very math-heavy and calculation-oriented site. MathJax is enabled there, and every question I scanned from their front page involves code or mathematical formulae. machine-learning is their third most popular tag at the moment, and questions in it are ...


3

I'm of the opinion that we should allow ML and AI research-style questions here, of the sort that would also could be on-topic at Cross Validated but would be less likely to hit their intended audience there than they would here. That is, I don't think there is a difference in topics so much as there is a difference between clusters of people who care about ...


3

In general, I think that we should allow questions on neural network architecture in order to attract and retain experts who actually build state of the art systems. But for that specific question, I'm torn and lean towards keeping it closed. It's a novice instead of an expert architecture question; a good answer to it looks more like an explanation of how ...


3

I'm going to say "yes". That doesn't mean we need to solicit those kinds of questions, but if / when they show up, I think we should just handle them "organically" if you will. That is, up/down vote them, answer them, comment on them, etc., exactly as we would anything else. I don't see any point in us taking on the effort of cross-checking with other ...


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