>we're in the data-collection and pattern-search phase. The scientific revolution is yet to happen.
Sure, and I would call that an age of exploration.
I just take issue with criticizing work in a field with no great explanatory theory, for a lack of theory. There are only two routes a researcher can take to address the criticism, abandon work in the field, or come up with the missing breakthrough theory.
It's sort of like saying no one should have bothered with biology until after Darwin figured out what was going on.
You're right. I didn't mean it as criticism, although it may have come out this way, only I decided to read a modern NN paper after not having touched NNs for almost 20 years, and was surprised to learn that there's little if any new theory.
Sure, and I would call that an age of exploration.
I just take issue with criticizing work in a field with no great explanatory theory, for a lack of theory. There are only two routes a researcher can take to address the criticism, abandon work in the field, or come up with the missing breakthrough theory.
It's sort of like saying no one should have bothered with biology until after Darwin figured out what was going on.