Friam

V&M notes

Classic

List

Threaded

1 message

Friam mailing list

V&M notes

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C31AB9.44A9B370
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all,

I've attached the notes from Mohammed's & my online chat re validation &
methodology. The main points discussed were:
1. Distinguish between (i) academics' and (ii) consultants' use of
validation & methodology. Former through peer review, being seen to do =
the
work 'the right way'; latter through whether it gives the right results =
or
not. The overriding aims of (i) is to try to have a "basic" =
understanding
about such varied topics as the economy, modes of social interactions,
population dynamics, computational anthropology, etc.. while on (ii) is =
has
more to do with trying to make better decisions that will have a direct
effect on the bottom over some limited time horizon.=20
2. Misuse of ABMs:=20
* the misinterpratetion of many-to-one problems (in particular, when
attempting to induce (micro) rules from observed (macro) behaviour;=20
* Over claiming predictive abilities (clients expecting quantitiative
predictions and getting qualitative ones).=20
* Very limited attempts at validation with the real world.=20
3. Proper use of ABMs: at least one proper use (both our experience) is
starting from (micro) rules and assumptions and generating the (macro)
behaviour that they imply. This deductive process is one-to-one in =
contrast
to the inductive many-to-one. A great deal of value of ABM to the =
business
world is in helping them understand more about the fallacy/veracity of =
their
assumptions. This in itself would help them make better decisions =
without
claims of predictive accuracy.=20
4. How to proceed:=20
* Ultimately, funding is needed=20
* Involvement of credible parties (SFI/BizNet?) (probably not the
established consultancies - either (i) already have their own approach =
or
(ii) would be embarassed to admit to clients that they didn't.=20
* Assemble a 'version 0.1' framrework - a brain-dump of as many
practitioners' approaches as practical.=20
5. Actions:=20
* RH to explore SFI/BizNet aspect
* Both to carry out their brain-dumps, try and get others to do same
and attempt to incorporate. (If anyone has any ideas about how to do =
this,
please pitch in).

Robert

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C31AB9.44A9B370
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
6.0.4630.0">
<TITLE>V&M notes</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>


Hi all,


I've attached the notes from =
Mohammed's & my online chat re validation & methodology. The =
main points discussed were:

 1. =
Distinguish between (i) academics' and (ii) consultants' use of =
validation & methodology. Former through peer review, being seen to =
do the work 'the right way'; latter through whether it gives the right =
results or not. The overriding aims of (i) is to try to have a =
"basic" understanding about such varied topics as the economy, =
modes of social interactions, population dynamics, computational =
anthropology, etc.. while on (ii) is has more to do with trying to make =
better decisions that will have a direct effect on the bottom over some =
limited time horizon. 

2. Misuse =
of ABMs: 
<UL>
<UL>
<LI>the =
misinterpratetion of many-to-one problems (in particular, when =
attempting to induce (micro) rules from observed (macro) behaviour; =
</LI>

<LI>Over =
claiming predictive abilities (clients expecting quantitiative =
predictions and getting qualitative ones). </LI>

<LI>Very =
limited attempts at validation with the real world. </LI>
</UL></UL>
3. Proper =
use of ABMs: at least one proper use (both our experience) is starting =
from (micro) rules and assumptions and generating the (macro) behaviour =
that they imply. This deductive process is one-to-one in contrast to the =
inductive many-to-one. A great deal of value of ABM to the business =
world is in helping them understand more about the fallacy/veracity of =
their assumptions. This in itself would help them make better decisions =
without claims of predictive accuracy. 

4. How to =
proceed: 
<UL>
<UL>
<LI>Ultimately, funding is needed </LI>

<LI>Involvement of credible parties (SFI/BizNet?) (probably not the =
established consultancies - either (i) already have their own approach =
or (ii) would be embarassed to admit to clients that they didn't. =
</LI>

<LI>Assemble a =
'version 0.1' framrework - a brain-dump of as many practitioners' =
approaches as practical. </LI>
</UL></UL>
5. Actions: =


<UL>
<LI>RH to =
explore SFI/BizNet aspect</LI>

<LI>Both to =
carry out their brain-dumps, try and get others to do same and attempt =
to incorporate. (If anyone has any ideas about how to do this, please =
pitch in).</LI>
 
</UL>
Robert


</BODY>
</HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C31AB9.44A9B370--