Type of activity: Scheduled session
Main topic: {T147708}
Timing: TBD
Currently, ORES is available in production and article recommendations is right around the corner. Where should we be taking advantage of these predictions?
## Problem statement
There are new useful AI services, but the predictions/rankings are not yet consistently surfaced through our UIs. Where should they be surfaced? What should we prioritize?
For example, ORES has 4 models:
* `reverted` Should this edit be reverted?
* `goodfaith` Was this edit saved in good-faith?
* `damaging` Did this edit cause damage?
* `wp10` What's the quality level of this article?
Where should these predictions be surfaced?
## Expected outcome
Develop a list of products and features that could take advantage of available AIs.
## Summary of discussion
While initially intended to be interpreted broadly, #ORES and general predictions became the focus of discussion. It seems that the #recommendation-api isn't quite ready for this type of discussion. @Quiddity brought up the proposal to do the obvious with ORES wp10 (article quality) models -- surface it on article pages. @jmatazzoni is interested in discussion surfacing the ORES edit quality models in his team's Edit Review Improvements project. @EBernhardson talked about pulling the wp10 models into ranking search results (and @Sumit signaled interest in collaborating). @Tgr talked about extending where the edit quality models of ORES are surfaced (e.g. diff pages) and discussed T132901, a specific project about using ORES scores to trigger flagged revisions. @Cenarium is already working on some patches to implement the ORES-based (as well as other scoring mechanisms) auto-flagging of edits.
## Links
* https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ai