预测的实践和修辞——以基于主体的建模为例

IF 3 3区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY International Journal of Social Research Methodology Pub Date : 2022-10-30 DOI:10.1080/13645579.2022.2137921
B. Edmonds
{"title":"预测的实践和修辞——以基于主体的建模为例","authors":"B. Edmonds","doi":"10.1080/13645579.2022.2137921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper looks at the tension between the desire to claim predictive ability for Agent-Based Models (ABMs) and its extreme difficulty for social and ecological systems, suggesting that this is the main cause for the continuance of a rhetoric of prediction that is at odds with what is achievable. Following others, it recommends that it is better to avoid giving the impression of predictive ability until this has been iteratively and independently verified, due to the danger of suggesting more than is empirically warranted, especially in non-modellers. It notes that there is a restricted and technical context where prediction is useful, that of meta-modelling – when we are trying to explain and understand our own simulation models. If one is going to claim prediction, then a lot more care needs to be taken, implying minimal standards in practice and transparent honesty about the empirical track record – the over-enthusiastic claiming of prediction in casual ways needs to cease.","PeriodicalId":14272,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Research Methodology","volume":"26 1","pages":"157 - 170"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The practice and rhetoric of prediction – the case in agent-based modelling\",\"authors\":\"B. Edmonds\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13645579.2022.2137921\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This paper looks at the tension between the desire to claim predictive ability for Agent-Based Models (ABMs) and its extreme difficulty for social and ecological systems, suggesting that this is the main cause for the continuance of a rhetoric of prediction that is at odds with what is achievable. Following others, it recommends that it is better to avoid giving the impression of predictive ability until this has been iteratively and independently verified, due to the danger of suggesting more than is empirically warranted, especially in non-modellers. It notes that there is a restricted and technical context where prediction is useful, that of meta-modelling – when we are trying to explain and understand our own simulation models. If one is going to claim prediction, then a lot more care needs to be taken, implying minimal standards in practice and transparent honesty about the empirical track record – the over-enthusiastic claiming of prediction in casual ways needs to cease.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Social Research Methodology\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"157 - 170\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Social Research Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2022.2137921\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2022.2137921","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要本文考察了要求基于代理的模型(ABM)具有预测能力的愿望与其对社会和生态系统的极端困难之间的紧张关系,表明这是预测修辞持续存在的主要原因,而这种修辞与可实现的不一致。继其他人之后,它建议最好避免给人留下预测能力的印象,直到这一点得到反复和独立的验证,因为这可能会带来超出经验证明的危险,尤其是在非建模者中。它指出,当我们试图解释和理解我们自己的模拟模型时,预测是有用的,这是一个有限的技术背景,即元建模。如果一个人要宣称预测,那么就需要更加小心,这意味着实践中的最低标准和对经验记录的透明诚实——需要停止以随意的方式过度热情地宣称预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The practice and rhetoric of prediction – the case in agent-based modelling
ABSTRACT This paper looks at the tension between the desire to claim predictive ability for Agent-Based Models (ABMs) and its extreme difficulty for social and ecological systems, suggesting that this is the main cause for the continuance of a rhetoric of prediction that is at odds with what is achievable. Following others, it recommends that it is better to avoid giving the impression of predictive ability until this has been iteratively and independently verified, due to the danger of suggesting more than is empirically warranted, especially in non-modellers. It notes that there is a restricted and technical context where prediction is useful, that of meta-modelling – when we are trying to explain and understand our own simulation models. If one is going to claim prediction, then a lot more care needs to be taken, implying minimal standards in practice and transparent honesty about the empirical track record – the over-enthusiastic claiming of prediction in casual ways needs to cease.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Social Research Methodology
International Journal of Social Research Methodology SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
52
期刊最新文献
Linking survey and Facebook data: mechanisms of consent and linkage Tate Liverpool’s Democracies: curatorial methodologies for exploring democracy An empirical evaluation of probing questions investigating question comprehensibility in web surveys A brief reply to David Byrne Effects of objective and perceived burden on response quality in web surveys
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1