<p>Interpretability actually fundamentally necessary to answer questions about overfitting.  There are a few recent books on the interpretability of models that disagree with the notion that there is no universal way of judging models.  Instead, there is a universal way, the problem is it cannot be automated with the current level of computer vision that we have.  For example see this book: <a href="https://christophm.github.io/interpretable-ml-book/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://christophm.github.io/interpretable-ml-book/</a>
Fundamentally, the ability to generalize  necessary to answer questions about AIC.  There are a few recent books on the interpretability of models that disagree with the notion that there is no universal way of judging models.  Instead, there is a universal way, the problem is it cannot be automated with the current level of computer vision that we have.  For example see this book: <a href="https://christophm.github.io/interpretable-ml-book/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://christophm.github.io/interpretable-ml-book/</a></p>

<p>The main problem is that calculating AUC, Adjusted R^2, and is not universal for all algorithms in Python or R even if the concepts themselves are agnostic and universal.   The moderators would have to allow questions that they have previously struck down as "how to code questions"? (*)</p>

<p>Because of the issue with a canonical question</p>

<p>(*)P.S. I can be more code specific if we are allowed too.</p>

<p>The main problem is that calculating AUC, Adjusted R^2, and is that methods are not universal for all algorithms in Python or R even if the concepts themselves are agnostic.  To really talk about this we would need to talk about computer code, so moderators would have to allow questions that they have previously struck down as "how to code questions"? (*)</p>

<p><em>I am still for it, I am just thinking the moderators might need to adjust the a threshold for acceptable questions/answers <strong>just this once</strong> if this is the direction you guys want to go.</em></p>

<p>(*)P.S. <em>To prove my point,</em> I can be more code specific about packages and libraries if we are allowed too related to universal methods to interpret models and prevent overfitting.  </p>
