ML umbrella now is too big, many fields were not labelled as ML some decades ago but now are under ML umbrella. My research areas are in game theory (economics), mathematical analysis, information theory, non-parametric statistic, ergodic theory, stochastic and non stochastic, etc. Now all of them are under the ML umbrella, in particular the reinforcement ML. Recently I found that my fields have some new names/ nomenclatures but similar concept: explainable AI, continual ML, online ML, lifelong ML, etc. I actually don't care the ML/AI buzzwords and the silly names they are trying to invent (as some analog terms used by different fields). I consider it is an expansion rather than advancement of ML research and it is good for multidisciplinary research, but I don't like the way some ML groups are trying to take all the light of the stage.
academic_wanderer t1_irfzoc0 wrote
Reply to [D] Giving Up on Staying Up to Date and Splitting the Field by beezlebub33
ML umbrella now is too big, many fields were not labelled as ML some decades ago but now are under ML umbrella. My research areas are in game theory (economics), mathematical analysis, information theory, non-parametric statistic, ergodic theory, stochastic and non stochastic, etc. Now all of them are under the ML umbrella, in particular the reinforcement ML. Recently I found that my fields have some new names/ nomenclatures but similar concept: explainable AI, continual ML, online ML, lifelong ML, etc. I actually don't care the ML/AI buzzwords and the silly names they are trying to invent (as some analog terms used by different fields). I consider it is an expansion rather than advancement of ML research and it is good for multidisciplinary research, but I don't like the way some ML groups are trying to take all the light of the stage.