> a holdout set of prospective data, where you actually predict the future, blindly, and see how you do. According to your theory, publishing would act as a 'n

> a holdout set of prospective data, where you actually predict the future, blindly, and see how you do. According to your theory, publishing would act as a 'nothing up my sleeve' validation of their model. Since, you can check this model in the future - you can do it for yourself. And yet, you seem to be complaining about this publication? (I still don't agree with this as a principle - since I wouldn't now expect the future to reflect the past, and the authors make no claim to predictive powers when they are identifying that the present is unlike the past)