>Comments please...
>
>Complexity and Scientific Modelling
>by Bruce Edmonds
>
>Abstract
>
>There have been many attempts at formulating measures of complexity of
>physical processes. Here we reject this direct approach and attribute
>complexity only to models of these processes in a given language, to
>reflect its "difficulty". A framework for modelling is outlined which
>includes the language of modelling, the complexity of models in that
>language, the error in the model's predictions and the specificity of
>the model.... [etc...]
>
>Accessible from URL:
> http://cfpm.org/cpm/cpmrep23.html
I have read this with interest, albeit from the perspective of a relative
amateur. And I realize that the question is one of *scientific* modelling.
But if the objective is also to identify the features of a more general
framework, I have a couple of (perhaps naive) questions, particularly from
the point of view of cybernetics.
What about modelling with dynamic features related to a possibly changing
environment? Are there any additional requirements for models which might
handle the less formal challenges of real world situations? These may be
part of what is usually meant by complexity.
I do not mean to criticize a model on grounds that are not within the
objectives of the proponent and may not apply. Yet there are many
situations where abstract formal models alone might be misleading. The
requirement may be for systems models, in which specificity relates to the
purposes or goals, and to the criteria which inform the feedback. In terms
of such a model, error relates not only to predications of the model but
also to the interactions and possible needs for adjustments among input
factors and outputs, and perhaps the re- assessement of goals and criteria,
etc.
My question, in summary: would the features required of dynamic feedback
models which change over time and provide a guide for action (e.g. models
useful for understanding and dealing with economic and/or environmental
variables) be included within the capabilities of the *scientific*
modelling described?
As I see it, the question is important since assumptions about possible
models which qualify as *scientific* may influence possibilities of
perception and responsible action.
Cheers.
Bruce B.
_____________________________________________________________
Bruce H. Buchanan, M.D. buchanan@hookup.net
4690 Dundas St. West (416) 231-6235
Etobicoke, Ontario M9A 1A6 CANADA
"We are all in this together!"
"Human Freedom..." - http://intermix.org/buchanan.htm
"Assessing Human Values" - http://intermix.org/buchana1.htm
"Science may be described as the art of systematic
over-simplification." (Karl Popper 1982)