You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
If we decide to Update/Expand, do you feel it would be best to stick with the current taxonomy of "Disease and Patient Categorization, Fundamental Biological Study, and Treatment of Patients" or do you think that it's still sufficiently broad enough to capture the vast majority of applications and work?
I am siding with cutting this section because it does sound a little outdated. That being said, I think we should retain some sort of short judgement or summary of the applicability/transformative potential or current state of deep learning.
Thanks @evancofer and @cgreene . I, too, am OK with cutting it in favor of a brief, update summary. Do we then retain the current section headers/organization (e.g. 2. Deep Learning and Patient Categorization 3. Deep Learning to Study the Fundamental Biological Processes....etc.) as the guideposts for our update or come up with another way of organizing?
This feels like it's becoming dated. We should consider between the options of:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: