It appears that a community manager has now blacklisted artificial-intelligence. Questions that only had that tag are now untagged. (The version without the hyphen, artificialintelligence, is blocked too.)
Stack Exchange sites have a mechanism called "intrinsic tag blacklisting" that's intended to do exactly this - prevent the tag that simply describes the topic from being used.
However, the way the system works means that it doesn't always work. The system takes the URL slug before .stackexchange.com, and blacklists that as an intrinsic tag. For this site, ...
I like theory.
I recently made a post and was highly surprised to find out that "theory" wasn't a tag option. I have never heard of the word "theorics" before in my life and only found it by looking at the list of tags. Edit: I didn’t even realize it was “theorics,” I thought it was “theoretics” which sounds more like a word to me.
Speaking as a native ...
Yes, absolutely. Tag excerpts are not meant to simply define what the word of a tag means. They are meant to describe when and how those tags should be used on this site specifically.
Since this site is not generically about either algorithms OR history, it becomes especially important to describe how those subjects fit in the context of this site.
I see ...
Yes! Explaining what the various tags are for is critical for a new site. Besides that, it also looks good when one goes to tag a question and sees that work has been put into the tag system.
Anybody can suggest tag wiki/excerpt edits. At the moment, we don't have any users able to approve them (it takes 750 rep to review tag edits during private beta), but ...
I'd say that questions related to game-theory can very often end up being on topic on AI.SE, but it probably doesn't need to be explicitly listed as being on-topic in its entirety. Game theory does show up in various areas of AI (not just like minimax for search in games, but also for like any other kinds of multi-agent interactions, and probably some other ...
Yes, tags with the same meaning should indeed be synonyms. The requested synonym is now in place; cnn was also merged into convolutional-neural-networks to update the eight existing cnn questions and deduplicate the tags on the two questions that had both tags.
They both mean the same thing, so we should have only one tag. They should be synonymized, because if you type cnn the tag convolutional-neural-networks does not come up as a suggestion, and vice versa.
Some of these tags seem related but I think game-theory has a well-known definition (from wikipedia)
the study of mathematical models of conflict and cooperation between
intelligent rational decision-makers
and it's applied in other fields besides AI.
IMO there should also be different tags for AI that's used in games and AI that plays games, the ...
I would go with gaming. It's implied that questions on an AI site will be about AI, so there's no need to specify that in a tag. The gerund form makes it clear that gaming is something the AIs are doing.
We can add tags for specific games (like Go) if they become big topics.
I think the tags are different. Let me explain with an example:
definitions: What is a deep neural network?
Terminology: Would this (< Insert some tech. behind some AI product/bot >) be a deep neural network or a RNN?
Categorizing things in pictures as certain types of objects definitely sounds like image-recognition to me. After all, the computer is supposed to recognize what the thing is and then put them into categories.
Two of the three existing questions in computer-vision don't really seem to be related to computerized image comprehension at all. The last - the ...
artificial-intelligence is what SE calls an intrinsic tag, as is ai.
Intrinsic tags are effectively pointless tags on a site, ie this site is about artificial intelligence, so does not need a tag on artificial intelligence. Likewise, programming is not needed on Programming.SE
optimization is much more relevant, as it is a specific class of questions ...
I don't know if the question you linked is suitably tagged, but I don't think a technology tag will help better categorize content.
"Technology" is one of those broad terms that can be applied to many many things. I think a technology tag would be applied inconsistently at best, and it will likely attract a lot of unrelated questions without adding any ...
I strongly recommend against using this tag info, for the following reasons:
Tag info should be easily understandable, provide clear information that tells a user whether or not to use that tag / whether or not it's relevant for their question.
Tag info should be unambiguous, correct, and not be up for debate. The information in there should be "generally ...
It looks to me like they are both used for similar questions, and based on the current Tag Info for the two tags they don't really appear to be different either. So, based on current tag usage, I'd argue that they should be combined into a single tag (which, in my opinion, should be natural-language-processing because that's the full term that everyone in ...
I created a soft-question tag, but people don't seem to like using it. But just because a question is "soft" doesn't mean it's invalid--many of the hard science sites have the tag, which was what inspired me to add it here.
I don't know if this is fully sufficient, but at least part of the solution.
Self-awareness has a lot of usage in general, and I don't think it's entirely synonymous. Consciousness, in the most basic definition, is merely awareness of an environment.
Additionally, non-artificial intelligences (humans) have self-awareness. So it's useful to be able to distinguish.
Sentience can refer to biological agents, so has a broader scope.
We sometimes discuss intelligence in general, as a concept underlying AI, and do too with sentience.
Emotional intelligence seems to be an informal term related to a specific kind of decision making
I don't see much relation to sentience in general, except that we regard only sentient ...
I introduced this tag because ACO is a well developed sub-field of swarm intelligence, so it deserves (IHMO) its own tag, like e.g. reinforcement learning deserves its own tag (compared to machine learning) on a website dedicated to AI.
I used ant-colony because it is shorter and there's no ambiguity in the field of AI. Furthermore, a lot of people do not ...
I worry about the confusion between StackExchange AI and Stackoverflow. But as the code refers to Artificial Intelligence and these languages are becoming the tool of Data Scientists, I believe it is quite valid.
I think that "deep learning" is already a standard expression, so this tag should be the main tag. The tag deep-network could also exist on this website, given that the expression "deep neural network" is also common, but I would not say that it is a synonym for deep-learning. A deep network is a network that is deep (that is, it possesses "many" layers). ...
This is done now, sorry for the delay.
We still have natural-language and language-processing, which sound pretty similar to natural-language-processing — it might be worth revisiting this NLP tag discussion.
Done - a tag synonym has been created and conv-neural-network has been merged into convolutional-neural-networks, thereby updating all existing questions. This has the added benefit of making the tag name consistent with all the other pluralized ones.
Currently I think it is used when the question is about some specific research or study, or it expects some authoritative study references from the answers.
Academia.SE has similar tag and it's described as:
Questions directly focused on performing academic research applicable to any discipline.
This tag is only for questions that are directly about ...