Eric, 

 

I have not read the original article, but still your comments caught my 
attention. 

 

As argued in this article <http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/12/1/9.html> , the 
disassociation of predictive and explanatory power seems misguided.  I suppose 
a statistical function of many observational variables could have no 
explanatory power beyond the many variables on which it is based, but then it 
would only predict what it already knew.  It would “just” be an intervening 
variable, and not a hypothetical construct, at all.   As we have agreed, some 
explanations can have “facetious” content, that is not predictive, but that 
content is not really explanatory, either.  Darwin certainly did not believe 
that Nature was a breeder who chose the better adapted individuals for 
breeding.  

 

Further, the idea of a distinction between that which can be directly or 
indirectly measured also seems a bit strange.  Every measurement is based on a 
“measurement theory” that tells you that the reading you make on the dial is a 
valid measure of the thing you actually care about.  Measurement theories fail 
all the time.  So, what then is a “direct” measure?  

 

One possible response to this comment might be to just tell me to piss off 
until I have read the article you are referring to.  

 

Nick 

 

PS  And isn’t  “real existence” the ultimate hypothetical construct? 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
ERIC P. CHARLES
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 2:41 PM
To: Steve Smith
Cc: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Celebrating the Higgs - explaning and predicting

 

Steve,
Interesting paper, but I'm not sure if I follow. The basic argument seems to be 
that we often explain things by imagining (with the help of statistics) 
hypothetical constructs that cannot be directly measured. As those constructs 
can't be measured directly, they don't help us predict things. Thus, predictive 
models are limited to using things that actually exist, while explanatory 
models are not so limited.

That seems like a really good argument for coming up with better explanations, 
not an argument for distinguishing and reifying two distinct modeling tasks. 

This is a topic I am quite interested in. I would presume that an ideal 
explanatory model would be identical to an ideal predictive model, though I 
grant that non-ideal cases might differ. What am I missing? 

Eric



On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 12:37 AM, Steve Smith <[email protected]> wrote:



Bruce -

I second the motion (very good post)!

Mendeleev's Periodic Chart was *my* first introduction (back when) to the very 
concept of having a predictive model that was (almost) entirely void of 
explanatory ability (as it stood when constructed).  I found the notion 
*fascinating* and it drove me into the field of Visual (Perceptual) Analytics 
many years later... seeking patterns that yield useful prediction without 
necessarily waiting for an explanatory model.

For those vaguely interested in the philosophical underpinnings of science, 
it's methods and utility, I recommend Galit Schmueli's (George Washington U's) 
paper on Predictive vs Explanatory Models (as well as *Descriptive* models)... 

arxiv.org/pdf/1101.0891





 
Thanks! Glad you liked it!
 
I have long been bemused by the strong parallels among the various
tales I was able to tell in that post.
 
Bruce
 
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Pamela McCorduck <[email protected]> wrote:

 
Bruce, that blog post is marvelous in its simplicity and power.
 
Pamela
 
 
 
On Jul 9, 2012, at 2:39 PM, Bruce Sherwood wrote:
 
See my blog:
 
http://matterandinteractions.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/the-higgs-boson-and-prediction-in-science/
 
Bruce
 
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Owen Densmore <[email protected]> wrote:
 
Lets chat about the Higgs discovery, its likely-hood of being correct, and
 
the impact it will have going forward .. at the next Friam @ St Johns.
 
 
Could someone see if Hywel White is available .. or anyone you know who'd
 
like to hold forth on the topic!
 
 
  -- Owen
 
 
============================================================
 
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
 
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
 
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
 
 
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
 
 
 
"Im Deutschen lügt man, wenn man höflich ist."
 
"In German, if one is polite, one lies."
 
Goethe, "Faust"
 
 
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

 
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
 

 

 
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to