Re: [Swarm-Modelling] Announce: metaABM 1.0.0

[Marcus G. Daniels]

Miles T. Parker wrote:
> > Using a general purpose programming language, there's the possibility 
> > of inferring a DSL by having a computer find or refine minimal 
> > programs that explain some pattern of input and output data.
>
> If you find that palatable, then surely one that is crafted by humans 
> is not such a bad thing? :)
To me the palatability of it is just a matter of how much data is 
available.   If there is a lot of data, and it is complex, then a 
computer is a tool to find order in it.  If there is not a lot of data, 
then sometimes perhaps all that can be done is invent stories to think 
about ways a system might work, and how one might obtain data.   But 
unless there is the possibility some data, however qualitative that can 
ground the theory, the activity is not empirical science.
> >  Ultimately what should matter are rules of predictive utility, not 
> > pretty stories..
>
> Can we *predict* what direction a flock of birds will fly? 
It seems conceivable that by using high speed 3d digital cameras, data 
on weather conditions, info about the time of year and geographic 
location, and some health/performance stats on the birds themselves, 
radio collar info of past movements,  it might be possible to find 
regularities after many observations.  Not 100% prediction of course but 
maybe better than random.   And if regularities were found, it seems 
conceivable that some of those regularities might have to do with group 
size, the physics of drafting, recent food intake, etc., and maybe even 
give novel insights to an ornithologist.
> Theories are perhaps nothing but "pretty stories", but they allow us 
> to define and share sets of rules that help us to understand and 
> *explain* -- in the most transparent and elegant way -- why birds move 
> in the way they do, and what the space of possible movements looks 
> like. Prediction is nothing but an arbitrary set of coefficients for 
> formulas that by definition fails the first time we encounter a truly 
> novel situation, and so is useless if we have no way to understand it, 
> communicate it, and apply it to analogous situations, e.g. "tell a 
> story". 
Coefficients for formulas are just a special case of functional 
programs.  Both can be fit to data, and compressed.
The story doesn't need to be invented by a human to be rationalized.