4 ms·
Because this is just mathematical cargo-cult scientism. If the basis for deciding "the model itself may require tweaking or redesign" is that "you still think
by ataggart 13y ago
Because this is just mathematical cargo-cult scientism. If the basis for deciding "the model itself may require tweaking or redesign" is that "you still think the results look wrong", you're not doing science.
- clavalle 13y agoYou are doing science. The first part: forming a hypothesis.
- tptacek 13y agoIt's not scientism. You're simply jumping to an invalid conclusion. Stucchio could not have been clearer that simple Python monte carlo models were tools for discussion, not magic oracles.
- JackFr 13y agoTools for discussion about what? Python coding? Monte Carlo methods?
- Bsharp 13y agoUnrealistic results are an indicator that something might be wrong with the model design or model choice which deserves investigating. Why is that such a bad thing? If you're modeling investment growth and your model is: future_value = investment_amt * (interest_rate ^ num_years) or future_value = investment_amt * (1 + (interest_rate * num_years)) you might realize after running it a few times and seeing incorrect results that the model is flawed (first case) or inappropriate (second case) and fix it to: future_value = investment_amt * ((1 + interest_rate) ^ num_years)