[gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Alfredo Tupone]

To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)

sci-libs has now 264 packages

The packages that I can move from sci-libs in the new category are:
caffe2
datasets
evaluate
foxi
gloo
huggingface_hub
ideep
jiwer
kineto
NNPACK
onnx
pytorch
safetensors
seqeval
tensorpipe
tokenizer
torchvision
transformers
XNNPACK

The packages that I can move from dev-libs in the new category are:

FBGEMM
FP16
FXdiv
oneDNN

What do you think ?

Alfredo

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Eli Schwartz]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 445 bytes --]

On 3/10/25 4:40 PM, Alfredo Tupone wrote:
> To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
> AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
> Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)


Of the three I favor sci-dl, since by and large these aren't really
about generative AI at all, and the term is otherwise too loaded with
confusion.

Although maybe it should be sci-ml.


-- 
Eli Schwartz

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Maciej Barć]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 855 bytes --]

Hi!

> Although maybe it should be sci-ml.

Let's _not_ use *-ml since for us ml stands for OCaml (which comes from 
ML - "Meta langauge").

sci-ai, dev-ai, and app-ai (say, "app-ai/ollama"?) are nice IMO.


W dniu 10.03.2025 o 21:49, Eli Schwartz pisze:
> On 3/10/25 4:40 PM, Alfredo Tupone wrote:
>> To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
>> AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
>> Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)
> 
> 
> Of the three I favor sci-dl, since by and large these aren't really
> about generative AI at all, and the term is otherwise too loaded with
> confusion.
> 
> Although maybe it should be sci-ml.
> 
> 

-- 
Have a great day!

~ Maciej Barć

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Xgqt
9B0A 4C5D 02A3 B43C 9D6F D6B1 14D7 4A1F 43A6 AC3C


[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 20895 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Filip Kobierski]

On Monday, March 10th, 2025 at 21:40, Alfredo Tupone <tupone@gentoo.org> wrote:
> To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
> AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
> Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)

I really like thi idea.
For better or worse the field is growing and it would be nice
to have a separate category for it.

In my opinion the category should begin with "sci":
- "sci-ai" feels the most general but buzzwordy;
- "sci-dl" is too specific as not AI is deep learning;
- "sci-ml" (machie learning) in my opinion would be the
  best choice as it describes the packages listed clearly.

--
Filip Kobierski

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Ionen Wolkens]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 657 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 09:40:09PM +0100, Alfredo Tupone wrote:
> To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
> AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
> Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)
 
> The packages that I can move from dev-libs in the new category are:

Guess can add dev-libs/ncnn to that list for my packages, most end-user
tools like media-gfx/realesrgan-ncnn-vulkan wouldn't make much sense
to move though.

Not sure what I'd prefer about the category name, but a clear split
sounds fine to me (both for users looking for these, or those trying
to avoid them ;p)
-- 
ionen

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Eli Schwartz]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1868 bytes --]

On 3/10/25 4:53 PM, Maciej Barć wrote:
> Hi!
> 
>> Although maybe it should be sci-ml.
> 
> Let's _not_ use *-ml since for us ml stands for OCaml (which comes from
> ML - "Meta langauge").
> 
> sci-ai, dev-ai, and app-ai (say, "app-ai/ollama"?) are nice IMO.


- please don't top-post

- Let's _not_ use *-ai since AI stands for generative artificial
  intelligence which most of these packages are not, even according to
  the intended use of the *-ai term in this thread

I don't understand your argument at all. "ml" is hardly a reserved
concept, and dev-ml exists precisely for "libraries and utilities
relevant to the ML programming language", which isn't going to get
confused with sci-ml/ for the same reason nobody would dream of
searching in sci-cpp/ for "scientific software written in C++", as the
emphasis is on *science* and naturally brings the concept of machine
learning to mind.

I could argue that "AI" is too confusing of a term to use because it is
the name of the pale-throated sloth (and because there are other
abbreviations that are DEEPLY not on topic for this mailing list). But
fortunately people possess the ability to recognize context, and will
recognize that Gentoo packages are not talking about members of the
animal kingdom. They will also recognize sci-machine-learning when they
see it.

Or, we could bite the bullet and stop clinging "short and witty two-word
categories".

Let's call it "sci-machine-learning/".

But obviously, whatever we call it shouldn't feel like deceptive
trickery to the people ***using*** the packages from this proposed new
category. So I oppose anything with the name "ai" in it, as it's way too
specific, unless it is strictly limited to e.g. ollama, which isn't
actually packaged in ::gentoo and isn't actually on topic as a result.



-- 
Eli Schwartz

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Maciej Barć]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1099 bytes --]

W dniu 10.03.2025 o 23:42, Eli Schwartz pisze:
> I don't understand your argument at all. "ml" is hardly a reserved
> concept, and dev-ml exists precisely for "libraries and utilities
> relevant to the ML programming language", which isn't going to get
> confused with sci-ml/ for the same reason nobody would dream of
> searching in sci-cpp/ for "scientific software written in C++", as the
> emphasis is on *science* and naturally brings the concept of machine
> learning to mind.

If I would see the name "sci-cpp" for the 1st time I would indeed think 
of C++ libs for scientific usage. Not sure what other "CPP" you have 
meant here. :)

I would say "ml" is kinda indeed reserved. But maybe we could move ocaml 
pkgs into "dev-ocaml" and then introduce "dev-ml". In case of having 
"dev-ocaml" and "sci-ml" nobody would get confused.

As I see "dev-ml" all the time I work on ::gentoo, having other "*-ml" 
feels very confusing to me.

-- 
Have a great day!

~ Maciej Barć

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Xgqt
9B0A 4C5D 02A3 B43C 9D6F D6B1 14D7 4A1F 43A6 AC3C


[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 20895 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Ulrich Müller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1351 bytes --]

>>>>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2025, Maciej Barć wrote:

> W dniu 10.03.2025 o 23:42, Eli Schwartz pisze:
>> I don't understand your argument at all. "ml" is hardly a reserved
>> concept, and dev-ml exists precisely for "libraries and utilities
>> relevant to the ML programming language", which isn't going to get
>> confused with sci-ml/ for the same reason nobody would dream of
>> searching in sci-cpp/ for "scientific software written in C++", as the
>> emphasis is on *science* and naturally brings the concept of machine
>> learning to mind.

> If I would see the name "sci-cpp" for the 1st time I would indeed
> think of C++ libs for scientific usage. Not sure what other "CPP" you
> have meant here. :)

> I would say "ml" is kinda indeed reserved.

Without context I would read it as "milliliter". :)

> But maybe we could move ocaml pkgs into "dev-ocaml" and then
> introduce "dev-ml". In case of having "dev-ocaml" and "sci-ml"
> nobody would get confused.

> As I see "dev-ml" all the time I work on ::gentoo, having other "*-ml"
> feels very confusing to me.

I tend to agree. We have some duplicates, but most are generic ones
like *-libs or *-misc, so they cannot cause confusion. The only more
specific duplicates are sys-fs / net-fs and gui-wm / x11-wm where the
second part denotes the same concept.

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Florian Schmaus]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 950 bytes --]

On 10/03/2025 21.40, Alfredo Tupone wrote:
> To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
> AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
> Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)

Thanks for your proposal.

I would go with sci-ai/*, even if all packages under that category would 
be about deep/machine learning. And while sci-ml would maybe more 
suitable, -ml seems to be established to indicate OCaml / ML, and we 
should avoid naming inconsistencies. For the same reason I would rule 
out sci-machine-learning.

This appears to leave us with sci-ai/* because:

First, 'AI' seems to be the term that is commonly used (just look at 
this mail's subject) and understood.

Secondly, while others may find sci-ai to buzzwordy, that could also 
been seen as an advantage.

And finally, maybe there will be non-deep-learning packages which we 
then could put under sci-ai/*.

- Flow

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 21567 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Bryan Gardiner]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2094 bytes --]

On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 18:42:49 -0400
Eli Schwartz <eschwartz@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 3/10/25 4:53 PM, Maciej Barć wrote:
> > Hi!
> >   
> >> Although maybe it should be sci-ml.  
> > 
> > Let's _not_ use *-ml since for us ml stands for OCaml (which comes from
> > ML - "Meta langauge").
> > 
> > sci-ai, dev-ai, and app-ai (say, "app-ai/ollama"?) are nice IMO.  
> 
> 
> - please don't top-post
> 
> - Let's _not_ use *-ai since AI stands for generative artificial
>   intelligence which most of these packages are not, even according to
>   the intended use of the *-ai term in this thread
> 
> I don't understand your argument at all. "ml" is hardly a reserved
> concept, and dev-ml exists precisely for "libraries and utilities
> relevant to the ML programming language", which isn't going to get
> confused with sci-ml/ for the same reason nobody would dream of
> searching in sci-cpp/ for "scientific software written in C++", as the
> emphasis is on *science* and naturally brings the concept of machine
> learning to mind.
> 
> I could argue that "AI" is too confusing of a term to use because it is
> the name of the pale-throated sloth (and because there are other
> abbreviations that are DEEPLY not on topic for this mailing list). But
> fortunately people possess the ability to recognize context, and will
> recognize that Gentoo packages are not talking about members of the
> animal kingdom. They will also recognize sci-machine-learning when they
> see it.
> 
> Or, we could bite the bullet and stop clinging "short and witty two-word
> categories".
> 
> Let's call it "sci-machine-learning/".

How about "sci-learn/"?  Not too long, and too ambiguous.

> But obviously, whatever we call it shouldn't feel like deceptive
> trickery to the people ***using*** the packages from this proposed new
> category. So I oppose anything with the name "ai" in it, as it's way too
> specific, unless it is strictly limited to e.g. ollama, which isn't
> actually packaged in ::gentoo and isn't actually on topic as a result.

Cheers,
Bryan

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Alfredo Tupone]

On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 08:47:42 +0100
Florian Schmaus <flow@gentoo.org> wrote:

> This appears to leave us with sci-ai/* because:
> 
> First, 'AI' seems to be the term that is commonly used (just look at 
> this mail's subject) and understood.
> 
> Secondly, while others may find sci-ai to buzzwordy, that could also 
> been seen as an advantage.
> 
> And finally, maybe there will be non-deep-learning packages which we 
> then could put under sci-ai/*.

I would go with sci-ai/* then,

as this category could also host non-deep-learning things 

Alfredo

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Eli Schwartz]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2192 bytes --]

On 3/10/25 6:59 PM, Maciej Barć wrote:
> W dniu 10.03.2025 o 23:42, Eli Schwartz pisze:
>> I don't understand your argument at all. "ml" is hardly a reserved
>> concept, and dev-ml exists precisely for "libraries and utilities
>> relevant to the ML programming language", which isn't going to get
>> confused with sci-ml/ for the same reason nobody would dream of
>> searching in sci-cpp/ for "scientific software written in C++", as the
>> emphasis is on *science* and naturally brings the concept of machine
>> learning to mind.
> 
> If I would see the name "sci-cpp" for the 1st time I would indeed think
> of C++ libs for scientific usage. Not sure what other "CPP" you have
> meant here. :)


I'm saying that even considering you say you'd find it confusing, I
still don't believe there is anyone who would actually find it confusing
in reality.

There's no sensible reason for anyone to assume that there would be a
category dedicated to "sci packages, but specifically the subset written
in the C++ programming language". I think it defies reason to interpret
a category that way.

It would be reasonable for someone to assume that there's a category for
"generally, development libraries written in XXX programming language",
and that's what dev-*/ does for various languages. Anything else, I
would say it ***cannot*** mean the ML programming language, and it MUST
mean something else which simultaneously has an association with
science, and the highly obvious answer is "machine learning".


> I would say "ml" is kinda indeed reserved. But maybe we could move ocaml
> pkgs into "dev-ocaml" and then introduce "dev-ml". In case of having
> "dev-ocaml" and "sci-ml" nobody would get confused.
> 
> As I see "dev-ml" all the time I work on ::gentoo, having other "*-ml"
> feels very confusing to me.


Every time I see "dev-ml" I try desperately to remember what programming
language it is, dev-ocaml/ would be a lot less confusing to me for sure.
To me, the language name is ocaml and "ml" is the family, it would be
like having dev-c/ contain both C++ and java libraries since they are
both C-family languages.


-- 
Eli Schwartz

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Arsen Arsenović]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1056 bytes --]

Filip Kobierski <fkobi@pm.me> writes:

> On Monday, March 10th, 2025 at 21:40, Alfredo Tupone <tupone@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
>> AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
>> Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)
>
> I really like thi idea.
> For better or worse the field is growing and it would be nice
> to have a separate category for it.
>
> In my opinion the category should begin with "sci":
> - "sci-ai" feels the most general but buzzwordy;
> - "sci-dl" is too specific as not AI is deep learning;
> - "sci-ml" (machie learning) in my opinion would be the
>   best choice as it describes the packages listed clearly.

As was mentioned, sci-ml would be confusing with Meta-Language.

The term "AI" has a very long and storied history, and covers the entire
field of machine learning and then some.  I think 'sci-ai' is most
fitting as a result (and, besides also being more fitting, it also is
not ambiguous).
-- 
Arsen Arsenović

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 251 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Sam James]

Arsen Arsenović <arsen@gentoo.org> writes:

> Filip Kobierski <fkobi@pm.me> writes:
>
>> On Monday, March 10th, 2025 at 21:40, Alfredo Tupone <tupone@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
>>> AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
>>> Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)
>>
>> I really like thi idea.
>> For better or worse the field is growing and it would be nice
>> to have a separate category for it.
>>
>> In my opinion the category should begin with "sci":
>> - "sci-ai" feels the most general but buzzwordy;
>> - "sci-dl" is too specific as not AI is deep learning;
>> - "sci-ml" (machie learning) in my opinion would be the
>>   best choice as it describes the packages listed clearly.
>
> As was mentioned, sci-ml would be confusing with Meta-Language.
>
> The term "AI" has a very long and storied history, and covers the entire
> field of machine learning and then some.  I think 'sci-ai' is most
> fitting as a result (and, besides also being more fitting, it also is
> not ambiguous).

I agree. I can live with sci-ml if the consensus goes the other way, though.

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Gordon Pettey]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1523 bytes --]

IMHO, "ai" is an extremely overloaded and over- and mis-used term.
It's nothing but glorified pattern matching, and calling everything "ai"
is very buzzwordy. I'd much rather see it named "ml".

On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 7:23 AM Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Arsen Arsenović <arsen@gentoo.org> writes:
>
> > Filip Kobierski <fkobi@pm.me> writes:
> >
> >> On Monday, March 10th, 2025 at 21:40, Alfredo Tupone <tupone@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> >>> To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
> >>> AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
> >>> Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)
> >>
> >> I really like thi idea.
> >> For better or worse the field is growing and it would be nice
> >> to have a separate category for it.
> >>
> >> In my opinion the category should begin with "sci":
> >> - "sci-ai" feels the most general but buzzwordy;
> >> - "sci-dl" is too specific as not AI is deep learning;
> >> - "sci-ml" (machie learning) in my opinion would be the
> >>   best choice as it describes the packages listed clearly.
> >
> > As was mentioned, sci-ml would be confusing with Meta-Language.
> >
> > The term "AI" has a very long and storied history, and covers the entire
> > field of machine learning and then some.  I think 'sci-ai' is most
> > fitting as a result (and, besides also being more fitting, it also is
> > not ambiguous).
>
> I agree. I can live with sci-ml if the consensus goes the other way,
> though.
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2309 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Petr Vaněk]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1162 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 08:47:42AM +0100, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> On 10/03/2025 21.40, Alfredo Tupone wrote:
> > To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
> > AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
> > Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)
> 
> Thanks for your proposal.
> 
> I would go with sci-ai/*, even if all packages under that category would 
> be about deep/machine learning. And while sci-ml would maybe more 
> suitable, -ml seems to be established to indicate OCaml / ML, and we 
> should avoid naming inconsistencies. For the same reason I would rule 
> out sci-machine-learning.
> 
> This appears to leave us with sci-ai/* because:
> 
> First, 'AI' seems to be the term that is commonly used (just look at 
> this mail's subject) and understood.
> 
> Secondly, while others may find sci-ai to buzzwordy, that could also 
> been seen as an advantage.
> 
> And finally, maybe there will be non-deep-learning packages which we 
> then could put under sci-ai/*.

From all answers in this thread, this one resonates with me. I prefer
sci-ai/* as well.

Petr






[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 954 bytes --]

> 
> This appears to leave us with sci-ai/* because:
> 
> First, 'AI' seems to be the term that is commonly used (just look at 
> this mail's subject) and understood.
> 
> Secondly, while others may find sci-ai to buzzwordy, that could also 
> been seen as an advantage.

This. 

Buzzwordy is kinda fine since categories are a human-oriented interface.
I.e., what is the first you think about where you would expect a package...

++ for sci-ai 

(Now, is it really sci-ai, or should we also come up with dev-ai (for
libraries without explicit scientific context) and sys-ai (for accelerator
device drivers) in addition? :)

> 
> And finally, maybe there will be non-deep-learning packages which we 
> then could put under sci-ai/*.
> 
> - Flow
> 


-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer 
(council, comrel, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Dilfridge

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Arsen Arsenović]

Gordon Pettey <petteyg359@gmail.com> writes:

> IMHO, "ai" is an extremely overloaded and over- and mis-used term.
> It's nothing but glorified pattern matching, and calling everything "ai"
> is very buzzwordy. I'd much rather see it named "ml".

Personally, I don't really care that a relatively well-understood word
has become a label for the next venture capital money burning ritual.

"AI" is a term from at least the 60s which very much incorporates
machine learning, and ML is understood, in Gentoo categories, to mean
Meta-Language.  I'd rather not overload it (in the context of Gentoo
repositories) with Machine Learning (which, yes, "ML" frequently refers
to, also).
-- 
Arsen Arsenović

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Ulrich Müller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 395 bytes --]

>>>>> On Sat, 15 Mar 2025, Andreas K Huettel wrote:

> ++ for sci-ai 

> (Now, is it really sci-ai, or should we also come up with dev-ai (for
> libraries without explicit scientific context) and sys-ai (for accelerator
> device drivers) in addition? :)

The possibility that we could later add a dev-* category is maybe the
best argument for avoiding *-ml as category name.

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 507 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for AI related packages

[Jaco Kroon]

Hi,

On 2025/03/14 14:22, Sam James wrote:
> Arsen Arsenović <arsen@gentoo.org> writes:
>
>> Filip Kobierski <fkobi@pm.me> writes:
>>
>>> On Monday, March 10th, 2025 at 21:40, Alfredo Tupone <tupone@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>> To declutter sci-libs and dev-libs from most of the "so called"
>>>> AI packages I think that a new category should be created.
>>>> Maybe sci-ai/ or dev-ai/ or sci-dl/ (deep-learning)
>>> I really like thi idea.
>>> For better or worse the field is growing and it would be nice
>>> to have a separate category for it.
>>>
>>> In my opinion the category should begin with "sci":
>>> - "sci-ai" feels the most general but buzzwordy;
>>> - "sci-dl" is too specific as not AI is deep learning;
>>> - "sci-ml" (machie learning) in my opinion would be the
>>>    best choice as it describes the packages listed clearly.
>> As was mentioned, sci-ml would be confusing with Meta-Language.
>>
>> The term "AI" has a very long and storied history, and covers the entire
>> field of machine learning and then some.  I think 'sci-ai' is most
>> fitting as a result (and, besides also being more fitting, it also is
>> not ambiguous).
> I agree. I can live with sci-ml if the consensus goes the other way, though.
For what it's worth, +1.

AI encompasses all the various sub-AI fields, including but not limited 
to GenAI, ML, DL, heck, even rule-based/"expert" systems.  I get really 
large neural networks are all the rage at the moment, but please let's 
not be restrictive here, GenAI may be all the current rage, but GenAI ≠ AI.

Kind regards,
Jaco