<p>Re <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/machine-learning" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;machine-learning&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;machine-learning&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="machine-learning-container">machine-learning</a>, its acceptability had been unanimously discussed in <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2760/ml-questions-here-or-at-data-science?noredirect=1&amp;lq=1">ML questions: here or at Data Science?</a> and <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/16/is-machine-learning-a-part-of-statistical-analysis">Is machine learning a part of statistical analysis?</a>.</p>
<p>The scope of the site is crystal clear: anything pertaining to statistical concepts that OP listed above.</p>
<p>Coming to the present context as to why the question was closed - the reason has been mentioned:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This question appears to be off-topic because it is not about probability, statistics, machine learning, data analysis, data mining, or data visualization.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>That is, the close voters couldn't churn out any statistical query in it. In fact, it was asking to compare two algorithms, their speed etc. Now, asking about algorithms is not forbidden provided there has to be a specific and explicit statistical query about it, which in this case, seemed to be at best not clear or outright absent.</p>
<p>In fact, it is further mentioned:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In edge cases or for very opaque questions, it can be helpful to ask what OP's statistical content of the question is, which might prompt OP to revise.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It might be that the close voters failed to comprehend any legit statistical query that OP tried to articulate. So, edit the post to clear it up what the relevant statistical content was!</p>
<p>Closing is not the end of the day; rather it's an opportunity to reframe the post so that it might be more comprehensible. It would go to the <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/review/reopen">Reopen</a> for the community to vet whether it was modified to an extent enough to reopen.</p>
