Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020)

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by shreyshnaccount on Saturday July 31, 2021 @12:43PM (#28019679)

I'm in favor of changing the terminology from AI and ML to something along the lines of 'prediction model' so that the idea of machines 'thinking' is replaced with them 'predicting'. it's just easier for our mushy meat brains to think that AI and ML means that it'll lead to general AI or as I like to call it 'general purpose decision maker'. it's all about the language!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by zoomablemind on Saturday July 31, 2021 @01:36PM (#28020111)

In not so long past, there was another popular expression - "computer-aided ...", which was quite fit for the practical use (like CAD for design, CAT for translation etc)

Perhaps, CAI for inference or insight would express it more fairly.

Alternatively, AI could've stood for 'automated inference', but sure it's all too late to rebrand.

We humans still not clear about nature of our own intelligence, yet already claimed being able to manufacture it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by skohan on Saturday July 31, 2021 @03:21PM (#28020876)

I think inference isn't the right term either. I think current ML is more like automated inductive reasoning.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by aidenn0 on Saturday July 31, 2021 @04:57PM (#28021484)

Automated inductive reasoning sounds a lot like artificial intelligence to me...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by skohan on Saturday July 31, 2021 @05:35PM (#28021760)

Idk maybe it's semantics, inference to me sounds more like a logical leap is happening, whereas in my mind the simplest form of inductive reasoning is just expecting a pattern to repeat itself.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by aidenn0 on Saturday July 31, 2021 @07:44PM (#28022423)

Expecting a pattern to repeat itself may not be sufficient to count as intelligence, but general purpose pattern recognition certainly seems to fit the bill.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by bississippi on Saturday July 31, 2021 @09:01PM (#28022815)

Computer Aided Pattern Recognition sounds reasonable in setting public expectations.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by aidenn0 on Sunday August 01, 2021 @09:36PM (#28032016)

I think you're right if you eliminate the word "aided"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by coddle-hark on Saturday July 31, 2021 @01:04PM (#28019842)

I like the term “data driven algorithm“. It makes it clear to everyone involved that what we’re doing is just adjusting an algorithm based on the data we have. No-one in their right minds would confuse that with building a true “A.I.”.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by tw04 on Saturday July 31, 2021 @01:31PM (#28020068)

To be frank: that very much does not make it clear to everyone involved. If you told the average Joe you had a “data driven algorithm” instead of “AI” you would likely get a blank stare in return.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by shreyshnaccount on Saturday July 31, 2021 @04:05PM (#28021160)

confusion is better than wrongful understanding?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by spockz on Saturday July 31, 2021 @01:25PM (#28020004)

What about “data derived algorithm”? The algorithm itself isn’t really driven by data after it has been designed anymore.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by skohan on Saturday July 31, 2021 @03:37PM (#28020978)

I mean if we want to be really accurate, we could say something like "highly dimensional data-derived function"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by shreyshnaccount on Saturday July 31, 2021 @04:23PM (#28021266)

why stop at that? 'high dimensional matrix parameterised data derived non linear function optimisation and unique hypothesis generation' just rolls off the tongue doesn't it xD

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by falcor84 on Saturday July 31, 2021 @01:41PM (#28020149)

I'm sorry to say that I don't see any clear line separating "data driven algorithms" from the embodied minds that we are.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by gmadsen on Saturday July 31, 2021 @04:57PM (#28021499)

why? we don't understand the architecture, but the brain certainly uses electrical signals in an algorithmic way

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by esfandia on Saturday July 31, 2021 @02:35PM (#28020562)

We already have "Pattern Recognition", not sure why it got absorbed by Machine Learning (the two terms seemed to co-exist with some overlap on what they covered), and then ML got absorbed by AI.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by jstx1 on Saturday July 31, 2021 @02:52PM (#28020678)

ML is still widely used and is much more common than AI as a term. So I wouldn't say that it has been absorbed by AI but their use sometimes overlaps depending on the target audience.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by kzrdude on Saturday July 31, 2021 @02:00PM (#28020282)

ML seems to be an ok term to me? It's the "intelligence" part in AI that needs a disclaimer.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by piokoch on Sunday August 01, 2021 @02:32PM (#28028684)

When I have encountered for the first time ML term I decided to learn what is that new great stuff. To my great surprise this was a typical old new thing called "statistical inference" in the days when I was working as a statistician.

There were a few new things, like ignoring model, choosing right variables, whatever was available was thrown into the equation, if it was clear that such "model" is over-fitted, there were some methods to overcome this by adding some random coefficients to the model that were smoothing it a little.

So, the naming is there... could be modified by adding some clarification that we don't care that much about understanding model we plan to use.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by MR4D on Saturday July 31, 2021 @02:11PM (#28020385)

I propose “heuristic optimization”.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by dgb23 on Saturday July 31, 2021 @08:07PM (#28022544)

I like this the most, but you can also generate things, which isn’t implied by optimization strongly.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by akomtu on Saturday July 31, 2021 @04:49PM (#28021431)

Iirc, predictive coding is a well known branch of math that's said to be the next big step towards AI.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by JohnJamesRambo on Saturday July 31, 2021 @05:21PM (#28021659)

Do I think or predict?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results (2020) by quickthrower2 on Saturday July 31, 2021 @05:24PM (#28021684)

I predict therefore I will be

[ Parent | on HN ]