A side-note: Statistical classification is machine learning, which is a subset of AI. Or atleast, was a subset of AI when it was classified itself. Machine learning has a lot of overlap with artificial intelligence, and statistical classification is, pedantically, AI. On a more general note, AI is an extremely broad field and -- I am assuming this is where you're coming from -- is not limited to the whole General/Narrow/Vertical/Foo/Baz/Bar jumble mumble.
Semantics aside, AI is being name-dropped to drive clicks. It's misleading. Doing logististic regression is not noteworthy and has not been for many decades. Further, we already knew how to improve memory without the regression, so the study doesn't accomplish much.
The article misleads about the science being done, and people are better off not reading it. For example as others have pointed out, regression is not a black box and it is clear what we do and do not understand using this model.
