You can not just confidently infer meaning from the name. Is "Light Year" a unit of time?

By your logic, "unsupervised learning" is not supervised learning, while SSL is sometimes classified as part of unsupervised learning, so now SSL isn't SL as well!

So "I think classifying them as disjoint is somewhat misleading."

is obvious.

My fault, deleted. Satisfied now?

I've now done some further research and read the comments.

By far, my conclusion is that, SSL is indeed, a type of SL. It contains features and corresponding label(s). From wikipedia:

>Supervised learning (SL) is a machine learning paradigm for problems where the available data consists of labeled examples, meaning that each data point contains features (covariates) and an associated label.

Since this is not a debate, I do not want to dwell on the definition. And indeed, *self-*supervised means that it does not require extra resource-consuming labelling from human, making training with huge datasets possible, like GPT-3.

And I disagree that seeing SSL as a kind of SL is the "wrong level" as a comment suggestted. What I originally intended to confirm was that, language modeling, which gives rise to GPT-3/ChatGPT... Is a kind of supervised learning with a large quantity (and sometimes good quality) of data. Strong model with simple, old methods.

It's clear that human and other animals must learn with reinforcement -- requiring the agent to act and recevive feedback/reward. This is an important part and I don't think it's proper to classify it as SSL. Moreover, psychology on learning points out that problem-solving and immediate feedback is very important for learning outcomes -- these feedbacks are typically human labels or reward signal.

So you want to argue that the name of the post is trivally true so not worth mentioning, and problematic(as your last paragraph suggest)? Not so constructive.