it's not. If you read an AI textbook it will tell you that it isn't. Even updating a spreadsheet would count in this technical definition but of course that isn't learning.

Personal experience isn't a data model. Otherwise there wouldn't be any new information in the Mary thought experiment https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qualia-knowledge/

>
Mary is a brilliant scientist who is, for whatever reason, forced to
investigate the world from a black and white room via a black and
white television monitor. She specializes in the neurophysiology of
vision and acquires, let us suppose, all the physical information
there is to obtain about what goes on when we see ripe tomatoes, or
the sky, and use terms like ‘red’, ‘blue’, and
so on. She discovers, for example, just which wavelength combinations
from the sky stimulate the retina, and exactly how this produces
via the central nervous system the contraction of the vocal
chords and expulsion of air from the lungs that results in the
uttering of the sentence ‘The sky is blue’.… What
will happen when Mary is released from her black and white room or is
given a color television monitor? Will she learn anything or
not? It seems just obvious that she will learn something about the
world and our visual experience of it. But then is it inescapable that
her previous knowledge was incomplete. But she had all the
physical information. Ergo there is more to have than that,
and Physicalism is false.