On Tuesday, January 8, 2002, at 01:06 PM, Paris Sinclair wrote: > What is the purpose of writing AI if you're going to avoid philosophy > and > maintain the status quo? Is the implication that AI is already seen as a > largely completed or successfull field?
Certainly not - but there have been great strides in AI research, and most of these results are totally unrepresented as Perl code. If we want AI people to be conversant in Perl and vice versa, I think it behooves us to use the standard terminology. Besides, people doing AI research are (rightfully) leery of anything that smells like crackpot code or pie-in-the-sky, and using non-standard terminology is one way to alienate yourself from "serious" researchers. Once you establish yourself as someone with some credibility you can start using whatever terms you like. It's been discussed briefly on this list before, but I'll mention it again: for a good introduction to ML topics/terms, check out Tom Mitchell's excellent book "Machine Learning". -Ken
