Timeline for Is it true that the number of questions is growing while the number of answers can't keep up?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 15:44 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stats.stackexchange.com/ with https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 15:44 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stats.stackexchange.com/ with https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Sep 13, 2016 at 5:04 | comment | added | shadowtalker | @Glen_b I recently saw a comment on Reddit that went something like "data science is what engineers call statistics when they don't know enough statistics to realize they're doing statistics". I think you could swap out "machine learning" for "data science" in this case. | |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 10:55 | comment | added | Glen_b Mod | @Scortch I think that's so, and again due to the increase in people learning ML - especially via MOOCs and such | |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 10:50 | comment | added | Scortchi Mod | I'm also tempted to suggest we get a higher proportion of poor ML questions than of poor trad stats questions: vague appeals for help - "My classifier is bad" -, reams of uncommented, inscrutable code that "doesn't work", & that sort of thing. | |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 9:15 | comment | added | Scortchi Mod | @tomka: There's already Computer Science, as well as Data Science & Computational Science in beta. And there used to be a machine learning SE site too, the questions from which were all migrated over here when it shut down. See ML questions: here or at Data Science? & links. | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 22:34 | comment | added | Glen_b Mod | @tomka I think ML and statistics share a a great deal more than you seem to (ML tends to be used on larger samples, but that doesn't make the issues of classification, prediction etc non-statistical) -- and splitting would just move the large group of ML-learners questions away from a pool of experts able to answer many of them, making it someone else's problem; it wouldn't produce more people capable of answering those questions. [I actually think ML is better here, where the various kinds of statisticians / ML people can bring their overlapping expertise to these problems - it's fruitful.] | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 16:12 | comment | added | tomka | I have been wondering whether it would make any sense to have a separate SE board dedicated to machine learning and try to exclude the topic from CV. There are good reasons not to do this of course. Indeed ML does statistics, but it usually assumes very, very large samples (or it assumes you have seen the whole population). So this is the major difference to classical statistics. Also there are other SE boards that share a communality with CV, like the stackoverflow or mathematics boards and a board dedicated to ML would outsource computer science topics beyond the scope of this board. | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 13:23 | comment | added | whuber Mod | +1. It might be worth noting that there is a strong seasonal component to the rate of questions (and not much seasonality in the rate of answers). The "seasons" are, as one might guess, academic ones: a gradual increase throughout the fall; a sudden drop in late December; a gradual increase in the spring; and a month-long drop in May. Recently, then, people would be observing the beginning of the first semester of the 2016-17 academic year. It is also true that about half the growth in the gap between Q's and A's is due to Q's that get closed. | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 10:40 | history | edited | Glen_bMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 15 characters in body
|
| Sep 6, 2016 at 23:40 | history | edited | Glen_bMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1159 characters in body
|
| Sep 6, 2016 at 23:25 | history | answered | Glen_bMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |