4
$\begingroup$

I have always thought about signal processing as a blended discipline. We already had the debate here, several times,for instance in:

I woke up this morning, and found that we are not in the science tab of StackExchange:

StackExchange - Science tab but in the technology tab instead:

StackExchange - Technology tab

I am not against dwelling close to Electrical Engineering, but I kind of believe that we (also) belong to Science folks if, well... Artificial Intelligence or Economics do.

  • Should we ask for a move?
  • More broady, could SE sites belong to two categories?
  • Why not art?
$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ We definitely need a spot in the science tab, preferably not too far from Mathematics. $\endgroup$
    – Gilles
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 11:21
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Yeah, we could kick chemistry out, to stand right by the master $\endgroup$
    – Laurent Duval
    Commented May 19, 2018 at 16:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Gilles Who can be in charge for requiring this move ? $\endgroup$
    – Laurent Duval
    Commented May 21, 2018 at 9:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I am not sure, maybe the mods could forward this on meta SE? $\endgroup$
    – Gilles
    Commented May 21, 2018 at 9:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Peter K. do you have any inputs on this? $\endgroup$
    – Gilles
    Commented May 21, 2018 at 9:59
  • $\begingroup$ i think we're we belong, but Computer Science belongs over in the Technology group. i dunno. where does Software Engineering live? $\endgroup$
    – robert bristow-johnson
    Commented Oct 1, 2018 at 4:26

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2
$\begingroup$

Should we ask for a move?

Yes, I would second that request although, I would not get too caught up with labels. The whole "Data Science", "Network Science" and other terms, are sitting a bit oddly with my understanding. What else does anyone expect a scientist to do other than work with data? So, independently of whether "we" are scientists or DSP can be considered "Signal Science" (...or whatever), DSP does have a place in the science.

More broad[l]y, could SE sites belong to two categories?

It would definitely increase the DSP.SE exposure but in my mind, I would think of the primary role of a discipline rather when considering its classification...

Why not art?

...yes, DSP definitely contributes to art too...But i am not sure how much help DSP can provide to the suitability of a chord in a scale.

Definitely things that have to do with Psychoacoustics will involve a lot of DSP because DSP is the primary way (in modern times) by which this science obtains objective quantifiable data on which it bases its inferences on. And definitely Psychoacoustics has a lot to do with Music and the perception of sound, but in terms of DSP, this is probably of a secondary nature. It can be resolved by redirection probably.

Hope this helps.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I was thinking of signal processing practice as a form of art or craft, like a surgeon: rooted in science, but requiring a lot of practice and techne $\endgroup$
    – Laurent Duval
    Commented Oct 16, 2018 at 11:28
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ And that view would find me inline with it too @LaurentDuval. I guess there are two levels in this discussion. There is the plain practical (or operational one) from the point of view of the functioning of the board and the one that is applicable to the subject. I wish more "practitioners" (even beyond DSP) took such a warm view of their craft :) $\endgroup$
    – A_A
    Commented Oct 16, 2018 at 12:25
  • $\begingroup$ "What else does anyone expect a scientist to do other than work with data? " I'd agree, with a broader sens of data. $\endgroup$
    – Laurent Duval
    Commented Oct 20, 2018 at 16:10
0
$\begingroup$

The problem with going over to science is that you start assuming that audience is primarily specialized. I'm sure we have all read papers where maybe a hundred of so people actually understand it, and those hundred or so people only write to the hundred or so.

In technology, you can simplify and use analogies and get most of an idea across.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .