Posted by
Robert Holmes-2 on
Mar 07, 2006; 2:49pm
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Technium-fyi-tp521542p521543.html
I'll just take a shot at two of the fish in this barrel:
On 3/7/06, Gregory Soo <gregory at soo.com> wrote:
>
> The Technium: Speculations on the Future of Science
>
> by Kevin Kelly, March 03 2006
http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/Combinatorial Sweep Exploration ? Much of the unknown can be explored by
> systematically creating random varieties of it at a large scale.
We'll need some *really* fast computers. Let's say my ABM has 100 parameters
(not an unusually large number) and lets say I'm only going to look at two
values for each parameter. A combinatorial sweep would comprise 2^100 runs.
Is this a big number? Well, consider that the universe is about 2^98
picoseconds old. So if I had a computer that could make 10^12 simulation
runs per second and I'd had it running since the Big Bang, I'd be about a
quarter of the way through my sweep by now.
> Evolutionary Search ? A combinatorial exploration can be taken even
> further.
A search strategy even more exhaustive than an exhaustive evaluation of all
combinations? Hmmmm.....
Triple Blind Experiments ? In a double blind experiment neither researcher
> nor subject are aware of the controls, but both are aware of the
> experiment.
> In a triple blind experiment all participants are blind to the controls
> and
> to the very fact of the experiment itself.
>
(OK, three of the fish). Non-consensual experimentation on human subjects is
unethical (ask the victims of Milgram's obedience experiments).
Robert
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20060307/888cbb3f/attachment.htm