Symbolic Regression is NP-hard

Re:Symbolic Regression is NP-hard by smegsicle on Sunday November 13, 2022 @11:39PM (#33590247)

rather than this usage being unclear, i think the muddiness is more about the original concept becoming more difficult to reference- it has a name, but that name now refers to a much less subtle concept

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Symbolic Regression is NP-hard by SantalBlush on Monday November 14, 2022 @12:04AM (#33590349)

I get it, it's like when someone mentions a slippery slope: are they talking about a fallacy, or a surface I can slide down?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Symbolic Regression is NP-hard by Cpoll on Monday November 14, 2022 @12:24AM (#33590440)

> Based on the context

Personally speaking, it's not always easy to tell which "begging the question" someone means from context. I often have to stop and ask "hold on, do they mean the premise assumes the conclusion?" (And all the worse for me if they just mean "brings up the question", because I'll spend a minute making sure I'm not just missing the fallacy).

In that sense, it's not quite the same as "slippery slope," which doesn't get used literally much anyway.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Symbolic Regression is NP-hard by goolulusaurs on Monday November 14, 2022 @02:23AM (#33591095)

"assuming the conclusion" is a much better way to refer to the original concept, IMO.

[ Parent | on HN ]