Showing posts with label insight. Show all posts
Showing posts with label insight. Show all posts

05 March 2024

🧭Business Intelligence: Data Culture (Part I: Generative AI - No Silver Bullet)

Business Intelligence
Business Intelligence Series

Talking about holy grails in Data Analytics, another topic of major importance for an organization’s "infrastructure" is data culture, that can be defined as the collective beliefs, values, behaviors, and practices of an organization’s employees in harnessing the value of data for decision-making, operations, or insight. Rooted in data literacy, data culture is an extension of an organization’s culture in respect to data that acts as enabler in harnessing the value of data. It’s about thinking critically about data and how data is used to create value. 

The current topic was suggested by PowerBI.tips’s webcast from today [3] and is based on Brent Dykes’ article from Forbes ‘Why AI Isn’t Going to Solve All Your Data Culture Problems’ [1]. Dykes’ starting point for the discussion is Wavestone's annual data executive survey based on which the number of companies that reported they had "created a data-driven organization" rose sharply from 23.9 percent in 2023 to 48.1 percent in 2024 [2]. The report’s authors concluded that the result is driven by the adoption of Generative AI, the capabilities of OpenAI-like tools to generate context-dependent meaningful text, images, and other content in response to prompts. 

I agree with Dykes that AI technologies can’t be a silver bullet for an organization data culture given that AI either replaces people’s behaviors or augments existing ones, being thus a substitute and not a cure [1]. Even for a disruptive technology like Generative AI, it’s impossible to change so much employees’ mindset in a so short period of time. Typically, a data culture matures over years with sustained effort. Therefore, the argument that the increase is due to respondent’s false perception is more than plausible. There’s indeed a big difference between thinking about an organization as being data-driven and being data-driven. 

The three questions-based evaluation considered in the article addresses this difference, thinking vs. being. Changes in data culture don’t occur just because some people or metrics say so, but when people change their mental models based on data, when the interpersonal relations change, when the whole dynamics within the organization changes (positively). If people continue the same behavior and practices, then there are high chances that no change occurred besides the Brownian movement in a confined space of employees, that’s just chaotic motion.  

Indeed, a data culture should encourage the discovery, exploration, collaboration, discussions [1] respectively knowledge sharing and make people more receptive and responsive about environmental or circumstance changes. However, just involving leadership and having things prioritized and funded is not enough, no matter how powerful the drive. These can act as enablers, though more important is to awaken and guide people’s interest, working on people’s motivation and supporting the learning process through mentoring. No amount of brute force can make a mind move and evolve freely unless the mind is driven by an inborn curiosity!

Driving a self-driving car doesn’t make one a better driver. Technology should challenge people and expand their understanding of how data can be used in different contexts rather than give solutions based on a mass of texts available as input. This is how people grow meaningfully and how an organization’s culture expands. Readily available answers make people become dull and dependent on technology, which in the long-term can create more problems. Technology can solve problems when used creatively, when problems and their context are properly understood, and the solutions customized accordingly.

Unfortunately, for many organizations data culture will be just a topic to philosophy about. Data culture implies a change of mindset, perception, mental models, behavior, and practices based on data and not only consulting the data to confirm one’s biases on how the business operates!

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post

Resources:
[1] Forbes (2024) Why AI Isn’t Going To Solve All Your Data Culture Problems, by Brent Dykes (link)
[2] Wavestone (2024) 2024 Data and AI Leadership Executive Survey (link)
[3] Power BI tips (2024) Ep.299: AI & Data Culture Problems (link)

28 February 2024

🧭Business Intelligence: A Software Engineer's Perspective (Part V: From Process Management to Mental Models in Knowledge Gaps)

Business Intelligence Series
Business Intelligence Series 

An organization's business processes are probably one of its most important assets because they reflect the business model, philosophy and culture, respectively link the material, financial, decisional, informational and communicational flows across the whole organization with implication in efficiency, productivity, consistency, quality, adaptability, agility, control or governance. A common practice in organizations is to document the business-critical processes and manage them accordingly over their lifetime, making sure that the employees understand and respect them, respectively improve them continuously. 

In what concerns the creation of data artifacts, data without the processual context are often meaningless, no matter how much a data professional knows about data structures/models. Processes allow to delimit the flow and boundaries of data, respectively delimit the essential from non-essential. Moreover, it's the knowledge of processes that allows to reengineer the logic behind systems especially when no proper documentation about the logic is available. 

Therefore, the existence of documented processes allows to bridge the knowledge gaps existing on the factual side, and occasionally also on the technical side. In theory, the processes should provide a complete overview of the procedures, rules, policies and responsibilities existing in the organization, respectively how the business operates. However, even if people tend to understand how the world works locally, when broken down into parts, their understanding is systemically flawed, missing the implications of causal relationships that span time with delays, feedback, variable confusion, chaotic behavior, and/or other characteristics borrowed from the vocabulary of complex systems.  

Jay W Forrester [3], Peter M Senge [1], John D Sterman [2] and several other systems-thinking theoreticians stressed the importance of mental models in making-sense about the world especially in setups that reflect the characteristics of complex systems. Mental models frame our experience about the world in congruent mental constructs that are further used to think, understand and navigate the world. They are however tacit, fuzzy, incomplete, imprecisely stated, inaccurate, evolving simplifications with dual character, enabling on one side, while impeding on the other side cognitive processes like sense-making, learning, thinking or decision-making, limiting the range of action to what is familiar and comfortable. 

On one side one of the primary goals of Data Analytics is to provide new insights, while on the other side the new insights fail to be recognized and put into practice because they conflict with existing mental models, limiting employees to familiar ways of thinking and acting. 

Externalizing and sharing mental models allow besides making assumptions explicit and creating a world view also to strategize, make tests and simulations, respectively make sure that the barriers and further constraints don't impact the decisional process. Sange goes further and advances that mental models, especially at management level, offer a competitive advantage, allowing to maintain coherence and direction, people becoming more perceptive and responsive about environmental or circumstance changes.

The whole process isn't about creating a unique congruent mental model, even if several mental models may converge toward one or more holistic models, but of providing different diverse perspectives and enabling people to make leaps in abstraction (by moving from direct observations to generalizations) while blending advocacy and inquiry to promote collaborative learning. Gradually, people and organizations should recognize a shift from mental models dominated by events to mental models that recognize longer-tern patterns of change and the underlying structures producing those patterns [1].

Probably, for many the concept of mental models seems to be still too abstract, respectively that the effort associated with it is unnecessary, or at least questionable on whether it can make a difference. Conversely, being aware of the positive and negative implications the mental models hold, can makes us explore, even if ad-hoc, the roads they open.

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post

Resources:
[1] Peter M Senge (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The Learning Organization
[2] John D Sterman (2000) "Business Dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world"
[3] Jay W Forrester (1971) "Counterintuitive Behaviour of Social Systems", Technology Review

14 October 2023

🧭Business Intelligence: Perspectives (Part VIII: Insights - The Complexity Perspective)

Business Intelligence Series
Business Intelligence Series

Scientists attempt to discover laws and principles, and for this they conduct experiments, build theories and models rooted in the data they collect. In the business setup, data professionals analyze the data for identifying patterns, trends, outliers or anything else that can lead to new information or knowledge. On one side scientists chose the boundaries of the systems they study, while for data professionals even if the systems are usually given, they can make similar choices. 

In theory, scientists are more flexible in what data they collect, though they might have constraints imposed by the boundaries of their experiments and the tools they use. For data professionals most of the data they need is already there, in the systems the business uses, though the constraints reside in the intrinsic and extrinsic quality of the data, whether the data are fit for the purpose. Both parties need to work around limitations, or attempt to improve the experiments, respectively the systems. 

Even if the data might have different characteristics, this doesn't mean that the methods applied by data professionals can't be used by scientists and vice-versa. The closer data professionals move from Data Analytics to Data Science, the higher the overlap between the business and scientific setup. 

Conversely, the problems data professionals meet have different characteristics. Scientists outlook is directed mainly at the phenomena and processes occurring in nature and society, where randomness, emergence and chaos seem to feel at home. Business processes deal more with predefined controlled structures, cyclicity, higher dependency between processes, feedback and delays. Even if the problems may seem to be different, they can be modeled with systems dynamics. 

Returning to data visualization and the problem of insight, there are multiple questions. Can we use simple designs or characterizations to find the answer to complex problems? Which must be the characteristics of a piece of information or knowledge to generate insight? How can a simple visualization generate an insight moment? 

Appealing to complexity theory, there are several general approaches in handling complexity. One approach resides in answering complexity with complexity. This means building complex data visualizations that attempt to model problem's complexity. For example, this could be done by building a complex model that reflects the problem studied, and build a set of complex visualizations that reflect the different important facets. Many data professionals advise against this approach as it goes against the simplicity principle. On the other hand, starting with something complex and removing the nonessential can prove to be an approachable strategy, even if it involves more effort. 

Another approach resides in reducing the complexity of the problem either by relaxing the constraints, or by breaking the problem into simple problems and addressing each one of them with visualizations. Relaxing the constraints allow studying upon case a more general problem or a linearization of the initial problem. Breaking down the problem into problems that can be easier solved, can help to better understand the general problem though we might lose the sight of emergence and other behavior that characterize complex systems.

Providing simple visualizations to complex problems implies a good understanding of the problem, its solution(s) and the overall context, which frankly is harder to achieve the more complex a problem is. For its understanding a problem requires a minimum of knowledge that needs to be reflected in the visualization(s). Even if some important aspects are assumed as known, they still need to be confirmed by the visualizations, otherwise any deviation from assumptions can lead to a new problem. Therefore, its questionable that simple visualizations can address the complexity of the problems in a general manner. 

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post 


🧭Business Intelligence: Perspectives (Part VII: Insights - Aha' Moments)

Business Intelligence Series
Business Intelligence Series

On one side scientists talk about 'Insight' with a sign of reverence when referring to the processes, patterns, models, metaphors, stories and paradigms used to generate and communicate insight. Conversely, data professionals seem to regard 'Insight' as something trivial, achievable just by picking and combining the right visualizations and storytelling. Are the scientists exaggerating when talking about insight, or do the data professionals downplay the meaning and role of insight? Or maybe the scientific and business contexts have incomparable complexity, even if the same knowledge toolset are used?

One probably can't deny the potentiality of tools or toolsets like data visualization or data storytelling in providing new information or knowledge that leads to insights, though between potential usefulness and harnessing that potential on a general basis there's a huge difference, no matter how much people tend to idealize the process (and there's lot of idealization going on). Moreover, sometimes the whole process seems to look like a black box in which some magic happens and insight happens.

It's challenging to explain the gap as long as there's no generally accepted scientific definition of insights, respectively an explanation of how insights come into being. Probably, the easiest way to recognize their occurrence is when an 'Aha' moment appears, though that's the outcome of a process and gives almost no information about the process itself. Thus, insight occurs when knowledge about the business is acquired, knowledge that allows new or better understanding of the data, facts, processes or models involved. 

So, there must be new associations that are formed, either derived directly from data or brought to surface by the storytelling process. The latter aspect implies that the storyteller is already in possession of the respective insight(s) or facilitates their discovery without being aware of them. It further implies that the storyteller has a broader understanding of the business than the audience, which is seldom the case, or that the storyteller has a broader understanding of the data and the information extracted from the data, and that's a reasonable expectation.

There're two important restrictions. First, the insight moments must be associated with the business context rather than with the mere use of tools! Secondly, there should be genuine knowledge, not knowledge that the average person should know, respectively the mere confirmation of expectations or bias. 

Understanding can be put in the context of decision making, respectively in the broader context of problem solving. In the latter, insight involves the transition from not knowing how to solve a problem to the state of knowing how to solve it. So, this could apply in the context of data visualization as well, though there might exist intermediary steps in between. For example, in a first step insights enable us to understand and define the right problem. A further step might involve the recognition of the fact the problem belongs to a broader set of problems that have certain characteristics. Thus, the process might involve a succession of 'Aha' moments. Given the complexity of the problems we deal with in business or social contexts, that's more likely to happen. So, the average person might need several 'Aha' moments - leaps in understanding - before the data can make a difference! 

Conversely, new knowledge and understanding obtained over successive steps might not lead to an 'Aha' moment at all. Whether such moments converge or not to 'Aha' moments may rely on the importance of the overall leap, though other factors might be involved as well. In the end, the emergence of new understanding is enough to explain what insights mean. Whether that's enough is a different discussion!

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post 


18 April 2023

📊Graphical Representation: Graphics We Live By I (The Analytics Marathon)

Graphical Representation
Graphical Representation Series

In a diagram adapted from an older article [1], Brent Dykes, the author of "Effective Data Storytelling" [2], makes a parallel between Data Analytics and marathon running, considering that an organization must pass through the depicted milestones, the percentages representing how many organizations reach the respective milestones:



It's a nice visualization and the metaphor makes sense given that running a marathon requires a long-term strategy to address the gaps between the current and targeted physical/mental form and skillset required to run a marathon, respectively for approaching a set of marathons and each course individually. Similarly, implementing a Data Analytics initiative requires a Data Strategy supposed to address the gaps existing between current and targeted state of art, respectively the many projects run to reach organization's goals. 

It makes sense, isn't it? On the other side the devil lies in details and frankly the diagram raises several questions when is compared with practices and processes existing in organizations. This doesn't mean that the diagram is wrong, just that it doesn't seem to reflect entirely the reality. 

The percentages represent author's perception of how many organizations reach the respective milestones, probably in an repeatable manner (as there are several projects). Thus, only 10% have a data strategy, 100% collect data, 80% of them prepare the data, while at the opposite side only 15% communicate insight, respectively 5% act on information.

Considering only the milestones the diagram looks like a funnel and a capability maturity model (CMM). Typically, the CMMs are more complex than this, evolving with technologies' capabilities. All the mentioned milestones have a set of capabilities that increase in complexity and that usually help differentiated organization's maturity. Therefore, the model seems too simple for an actual categorization.  

Typically, data collection has a specific scope resuming to surveys, interviews and/or research. However, the definition can be extended to the storage of data within organizations. Thus, data collection as the gathering of raw data is mainly done as part of their value supporting processes, and given the degree of digitization of data, one can suppose that most organizations gather data for the different purposes, even if only a small part are maybe digitized.

Even if many organizations build data warehouses, marts, lakehouses, mashes or whatever architecture might be en-vogue these days, an important percentage of the reporting needs are covered by standard reports or reporting tools that access directly the source systems without data preparation or even data visualization. The first important question is what is understood by data analytics? Is it only the use of machine learning and statistical analysis? Does it resume only to pattern and insight finding or does it includes also what is typically considered under the Business Intelligence umbrella? 

Pragmatically thinking, Data Analytics should consider BI capabilities as well as its an extension of the current infrastructure to consider analytic capabilities. On the other side Data Warehousing and BI are considered together by DAMA as part of their Data Management methodology. Moreover, organizations may have a Data Strategy and a BI strategy, respectively a Data Analytics strategy as they might have different goals, challenges and bodies to support them. To make it even more complicated, an organization might even consider all these important topics as part of the Data or even Information Governance, or consider BI or Analytics without Data Management. 

So, a Data Strategy might or might not address Data Analytics at all. It's a matter of management philosophy, organizational structure, politics and other factors. Probably, having a strayegy related to data should count. Even if a written and communicated data-related strategy is recommended for all medium to big organizations, only a small percentage of them have one, while small organizations might ignore the topic completely.

At least in the past, data analysis and its various subcomponents was performed before preparing and visualizing the data, or at least in parallel with data visualization. Frankly, it's a strange succession of steps. Or does it refers to exploratory data analysis (EDA) from a statistical perspective, which requires statistical experience to model and interpret the facts? Moreover, data exploration and discovery happen usually in the early stages.

The most puzzling step is the last one - what does the author intended with it? Ideally, data should be actionable, at least that's what one says about KPIs, OKRs and other metrics. Does it make sense to extend Data Analytics into the decision-making process? Where does a data professional's responsibilities end and which are those boundaries? Or does it refer to the actions that need to be performed by data professionals? 

The natural step after communicating insight is for the management to take action and provide feedback. Furthermore, the decisions taken have impact on the artifacts built and a reevaluation of the business problem, assumptions and further components is needed. The many steps of analytics projects are iterative, some iterations affecting the Data Strategy as well. The diagram shows the process as linear, which is not the case.

For sure there's an interface between Data Analytics and Decision-Making and the processes associated with them, however there should be clear boundaries. E.g., it's a data professional's responsibility to make sure that the data/information is actionable and eventually advise upon it, though whether the entitled people act on it is a management topic. Not acting upon an information is also a decision. Overstepping boundaries can put the data professional into a strange situation in which he becomes responsible and eventually accountable for an action not taken, which is utopic.

The final question - is the last mile representative for the analytical process? The challenge is not the analysis and communication of data but of making sure that the feedback processes work and the changes are addressed correspondingly, that value is created continuously from the data analytics infrastructure, that data-related risks and opportunities are addressed as soon they are recognized. 

As any model, a diagram doesn't need to be correct to be useful and might not be even wrong in the right context and argumentation. A data analytics CMM might allow better estimates and comparison between organizations, though it can easily become more complex to use. Between the two models lies probably a better solution for modeling the data analytics process.

Resources:
[1] Brent Dykes (2022) "Data Analytics Marathon: Why Your Organization Must Focus On The Finish", Forbes (link)
[2] Brent Dykes (2019) Effective Data Storytelling: How to Drive Change with Data, Narrative and Visuals (link)

06 November 2020

🧭Business Intelligence: Perspectives (Part VI: Data Soup - Reports vs. Data Visualizations)

Business Intelligence Series
Business Intelligence Series

Considering visualizations, John Tukey remarked that ‘the greatest value of a picture is when it forces us to notice what we never expected to see’, which is not always the case for many of the graphics and visualizations available in organizations, typically in the form of simple charts and dashboards, quite often with no esthetics or meaning behind.

In general, reports are needed as source for operational activities, in which the details in form of raw or aggregate data are important. As one moves further to the tactical or strategic aspects of a business, visualizations gain in importance especially when they allow encoding data and information, respectively variations, trends or relations in smaller places with minimal loss of information.

There are also different aspects of visualizations that need to be considered. Modern tools allow rapid visualization and interactive navigation of data across different variables which is great as long one knows what is searching for, which is not always the case.

There are junk charts in which the data drowns in graphical elements that bring no value to the reader, in extremis even distorting the message/meaning.

There are graphics/visualizations that attempt bringing together and encoding multiple variables in respect to a theme, and for which a ‘project’ is typically needed as data is not ad-hoc available, don’t have the desired quality or need further transformations to be ready for consumption. Good quality graphics/visualizations require time and a good understanding of the business, which are not necessarily available into the BI/Analytics teams, and unfortunately few organizations do something in that direction, ignoring typically such needs. In this type of environments is stressed the rapid availability of data for decision-making or action-relevant insight, which depends typically on the consumer.

The story-telling capabilities of graphics/visualizations are often exaggerated. Yes, they can tell a story though stories need to be framed into a context/problem, some background and further references need to be provided, while without detailed data the graphics/visualizations are just nice representations in which each consumer understands what he can.

In an ideal world the consumer and the ‘designer’ would work together to identify the important data for the theme considered, to find the appropriate level of detail, respectively the best form of encoding. Such attempts can stop at table-based representations (aka reports), respectively basic or richer forms of graphical representations. One can consider reports as an early stage of the visualization process, with the potential to derive move value when the data allow meaningful graphical representations. Unfortunately, the time, data and knowledge available seldom make this achievable.

In addition, a well-designed report can be used as basis for multiple purposes, while a graphic/visualization can enforce more limitations. Ideal would be when multiple forms of representation (including reports) are combined to harness the value of data. Navigations from visualizations to detailed data can be useful to understand what happens; learning and understanding the various aspects being an iterative process.

It’s also difficult to demonstrate the value of insight derived from visualizations, especially when graphical literacy goes behind the numeracy and statistical literacy - many consumers lacking the skills needed to evaluate numbers and statistics adequately. If for a good artistic movie you need an assistance to enjoy the show and understand the message(s) behind it, the same can be said also about good graphics/visualizations. Moreover, this requires creativity, abstraction-based thinking, and other capabilities to harness the value of representations.

Given the considerable volume of requirements related to the need of basis data, reports will continue to be on high demand in organizations. In exchange visualizations can complement them by providing insights otherwise not available.

Initially published on Medium as answer to a post on Reporting and Visualizations. 

30 October 2020

Data Science: Data Strategy (Part II: Generalists vs Specialists in the Field)

Data Science

Division of labor favorizes the tasks done repeatedly, where knowledge of the broader processes is not needed, where aspects as creativity are needed only at a small scale. Division invaded the IT domains as tools, methodologies and demands increased in complexity, and therefore Data Science and BI/Analytics make no exception from this.

The scale of this development gains sometimes humorous expectations or misbelieves when one hears headhunters asking potential candidates whether they are upfront or backend experts when a good understanding of both aspects is needed for providing adequate results. The development gains tragicomical implications when one is limited in action only to a given area despite the extended expertise, or when a generalist seems to step on the feet of specialists, sometimes from the right entitled reasons. 

Headhunters’ behavior is rooted maybe in the poor understanding of the domain of expertise and implications of the job descriptions. It’s hard to understand how people sustain of having knowledge about a domain just because they heard the words flying around and got some glimpse of the connotations associated with the words. Unfortunately, this is extended to management and further in the business environment, with all the implications deriving from it. 

As Data Science finds itself at the intersection between Artificial Intelligence, Data Mining, Machine Learning, Neurocomputing, Pattern Recognition, Statistics and Data Processing, the center of gravity is hard to determine. One way of dealing with the unknown is requiring candidates to have a few years of trackable experience in the respective fields or in the use of a few tools considered as important in the respective domains. Of course, the usage of tools and techniques is important, though it’s a big difference between using a tool and understanding the how, when, why, where, in which ways and by what means a tool can be used effectively to create value. This can be gained only when one’s exposed to different business scenarios across industries and is a tough thing to demand from a profession found in its baby steps. 

Moreover, being a good data scientist involves having a deep insight into the businesses, being able to understand data and the demands associated with data – the various qualitative and quantitative aspects. Seeing the big picture is important in defining, approaching and solving problems. The more one is exposed to different techniques and business scenarios, with right understanding and some problem-solving skillset one can transpose and solve problems across domains. However, the generalist will find his limitations as soon a certain depth is reached, and the collaboration with a specialist is then required. A good collaboration between generalists and specialists is important in complex projects which overreach the boundaries of one person’s knowledge and skillset. 

Complexity is addressed when one can focus on the important characteristic of the problem, respectively when the models built can reflect the demands. The most important skillset besides the use of technical tools is the ability to model problems and root the respective problems into data, to elaborate theories and check them against reality. 

Complex problems can require specialization in certain fields, though seldom one problem is dependent only on one aspect of the business, as problems occur in overreaching contexts that span sometimes the borders of an organization. In addition, the ability to solve problems seem to be impacted by the diversity of the people involved into the task, sometimes even with backgrounds not directly related to organization’s activity. As in evolution, a team’s diversity is an important factor in achievement and learning, most gain being obtained when knowledge gets shared and harnessed beyond the borders of teams.

Note:
Written as answer to a Medium post on Data Science generalists vs specialists.

Data Science: Data Strategy (Part I: Big Data vs. Business Strategies)

Data Science

A strategy, independently on whether applied to organizations, chess, and other situations, allows identifying the moves having the most promising results from a range of possible moves that can change as one progresses into the game. Typically, the moves compete for same or similar resources, each move having at the respective time a potential value expressed in quantitative and/or qualitative terms, while the values are dependent on the information available about one’s and partners’ positions into the game. Therefore, a strategy is dependent on the decision-making processes in place, the information available about own business, respective the concurrence, as well about the game.

Big data is not about a technology but an umbrella term for multiple technologies that support in handling data with high volume, veracity, velocity or variety. The technologies attempt helping organizations in harnessing what is known as Big data (data having the before mentioned characteristics), for example by allowing answering to business questions, gaining insight into the business or market, improving decision-making. Through this Big data helps delivering value to businesses, at least in theory.

Big-data technologies can harness all data of an organization though this doesn’t imply that all data can provide value, especially when considered in respect to the investments made. Data bring value when they have the potential of uncovering hidden trends or (special) patterns of behavior, when they can be associated in new meaningful ways. Data that don’t reflect such characteristics are less susceptible of bringing value for an organization no matter how much one tries to process the respective data. However, looking at the data through multiple techniques can help organization get a better understanding of the data, though here is more about the processes of attempting understanding the data than the potential associated directly with the data.

Through active effort in understanding the data one becomes aware of the impact the quality of data have on business decisions, on how the business and processes are reflected in its data, how data can be used to control processes and focus on what matters. These are aspects that can be corroborated with the use of simple BI capabilities and don’t necessarily require more complex capabilities or tools. Therefore allowing employees the time to analyze and play with the data, can in theory have a considerable impact on how data are harnessed within an organization.

If an organization’s decision-making processes is dependent on actual data and insight (e.g. stock market) then the organization is more likely to profit from it. In opposition, organizations whose decision-making processes hand handle hours, days or months of latency in their data, then more likely the technologies will bring little value. Probably can be found similar examples for veracity, variety or similar characteristics consider under Big data.

The Big data technologies can make a difference especially when the extreme aspects of their characteristics can be harnessed. One talks about potential use which is different than the actual use. The use of technologies doesn’t equate with results, as knowledge about the tools and the business is mandatory to harness the respective tools. For example, insight doesn’t necessarily imply improved decision-making because it relies on people’s understanding about the business, about the numbers and models used.

That’s maybe one of the reasons why organization fail in deriving value from Big data. It’s great that companies invest in their Big data, Analytics/BI infrastructures, though without working actively in integrating the new insights/knowledge and upgrading people’s skillset, the effects will be under expectations. Investing in employees’ skillset is maybe one of the important decisions an organization can make as part of its strategy.

Note:
Written as answer to a Medium post on Big data and business strategies. 

20 December 2018

🔭Data Science: Accuracy (Just the Quotes)

"Accurate and minute measurement seems to the nonscientific imagination a less lofty and dignified work than looking for something new. But nearly all the grandest discoveries of science have been but the rewards of accurate measurement and patient long contained labor in the minute sifting of numerical results." (William T Kelvin, "Report of the British Association For the Advancement of Science" Vol. 41, 1871)

"It is surprising to learn the number of causes of error which enter into the simplest experiment, when we strive to attain rigid accuracy." (William S Jevons, "The Principles of Science: A Treatise on Logic and Scientific Method", 1874)

"The test of the accuracy and completeness of a description is, not that it may assist, but that it cannot mislead." (Burt G Wilder, "A Partial Revision of Anatomical Nomenclature", Science, 1881)

"Accuracy of statement is one of the first elements of truth; inaccuracy is a near kin to falsehood." (Tyron Edwards, "A Dictionary of Thoughts", 1891)

"A statistical estimate may be good or bad, accurate or the reverse; but in almost all cases it is likely to be more accurate than a casual observer’s impression, and the nature of things can only be disproved by statistical methods." (Arthur L Bowley, "Elements of Statistics", 1901)

"Great numbers are not counted correctly to a unit, they are estimated; and we might perhaps point to this as a division between arithmetic and statistics, that whereas arithmetic attains exactness, statistics deals with estimates, sometimes very accurate, and very often sufficiently so for their purpose, but never mathematically exact." (Arthur L Bowley, "Elements of Statistics", 1901)

"Statistics may, for instance, be called the science of counting. Counting appears at first sight to be a very simple operation, which any one can perform or which can be done automatically; but, as a matter of fact, when we come to large numbers, e.g., the population of the United Kingdom, counting is by no means easy, or within the power of an individual; limits of time and place alone prevent it being so carried out, and in no way can absolute accuracy be obtained when the numbers surpass certain limits." (Sir Arthur L Bowley, "Elements of Statistics", 1901)

"Accuracy is the foundation of everything else." (Thomas H Huxley, "Method and Results", 1893)

"An experiment is an observation that can be repeated, isolated and varied. The more frequently you can repeat an observation, the more likely are you to see clearly what is there and to describe accurately what you have seen. The more strictly you can isolate an observation, the easier does your task of observation become, and the less danger is there of your being led astray by irrelevant circumstances, or of placing emphasis on the wrong point. The more widely you can vary an observation, the more clearly will be the uniformity of experience stand out, and the better is your chance of discovering laws." (Edward B Titchener, "A Text-Book of Psychology", 1909)

"Science begins with measurement and there are some people who cannot be measurers; and just as we distinguish carpenters who can work to this or that traction of an inch of accuracy, so we must distinguish ourselves and our acquaintances as able to observe and record to this or that degree of truthfulness." (John A Thomson, "Introduction to Science", 1911)

"The ordinary mathematical treatment of any applied science substitutes exact axioms for the approximate results of experience, and deduces from these axioms the rigid mathematical conclusions. In applying this method it must not be forgotten that the mathematical developments transcending the limits of exactness of the science are of no practical value. It follows that a large portion of abstract mathematics remains without finding any practical application, the amount of mathematics that can be usefully employed in any science being in proportion to the degree of accuracy attained in the science. Thus, while the astronomer can put to use a wide range of mathematical theory, the chemist is only just beginning to apply the first derivative, i. e. the rate of change at which certain processes are going on; for second derivatives he does not seem to have found any use as yet." (Felix Klein, "Lectures on Mathematics", 1911)

"It [science] involves an intelligent and persistent endeavor to revise current beliefs so as to weed out what is erroneous, to add to their accuracy, and, above all, to give them such shape that the dependencies of the various facts upon one another may be as obvious as possible." (John Dewey, "Democracy and Education", 1916)

"The man of science, by virtue of his training, is alone capable of realising the difficulties - often enormous - of obtaining accurate data upon which just judgment may be based." (Sir Richard Gregory, "Discovery; or, The Spirit and Service of Science", 1918)

"The complexity of a system is no guarantee of its accuracy." (John P Jordan, "Cost accounting; principles and practice", 1920)

"Science does not aim at establishing immutable truths and eternal dogmas; its aim is to approach the truth by successive approximations, without claiming that at any stage final and complete accuracy has been achieved." (Bertrand Russell, "The ABC of Relativity", 1925)

"Science is but a method. Whatever its material, an observation accurately made and free of compromise to bias and desire, and undeterred by consequence, is science." (Hans Zinsser, "Untheological Reflections", The Atlantic Monthly, 1929)

"The structure of a theoretical system tells us what alternatives are open in the possible answers to a given question. If observed facts of undoubted accuracy will not fit any of the alternatives it leaves open, the system itself is in need of reconstruction." (Talcott Parsons, "The structure of social action", 1937)

"Science, in the broadest sense, is the entire body of the most accurately tested, critically established, systematized knowledge available about that part of the universe which has come under human observation. For the most part this knowledge concerns the forces impinging upon human beings in the serious business of living and thus affecting man’s adjustment to and of the physical and the social world. […] Pure science is more interested in understanding, and applied science is more interested in control […]" (Austin L Porterfield, "Creative Factors in Scientific Research", 1941)

"The enthusiastic use of statistics to prove one side of a case is not open to criticism providing the work is honestly and accurately done, and providing the conclusions are not broader than indicated by the data. This type of work must not be confused with the unfair and dishonest use of both accurate and inaccurate data, which too commonly occurs in business. Dishonest statistical work usually takes the form of: (1) deliberate misinterpretation of data; (2) intentional making of overestimates or underestimates; and (3) biasing results by using partial data, making biased surveys, or using wrong statistical methods." (John R Riggleman & Ira N Frisbee, "Business Statistics", 1951)

"Being built on concepts, hypotheses, and experiments, laws are no more accurate or trustworthy than the wording of the definitions and the accuracy and extent of the supporting experiments." (Gerald Holton, "Introduction to Concepts and Theories in Physical Science", 1952)

"Scientists whose work has no clear, practical implications would want to make their decisions considering such things as: the relative worth of (1) more observations, (2) greater scope of his conceptual model, (3) simplicity, (4) precision of language, (5) accuracy of the probability assignment." (C West Churchman, "Costs, Utilities, and Values", 1956)

"The precision of a number is the degree of exactness with which it is stated, while the accuracy of a number is the degree of exactness with which it is known or observed. The precision of a quantity is reported by the number of significant figures in it." (Edmund C Berkeley & Lawrence Wainwright, Computers: Their Operation and Applications", 1956)

"The art of using the language of figures correctly is not to be over-impressed by the apparent air of accuracy, and yet to be able to take account of error and inaccuracy in such a way as to know when, and when not, to use the figures. This is a matter of skill, judgment, and experience, and there are no rules and short cuts in acquiring this expertness." (Ely Devons, "Essays in Economics", 1961)

"The two most important characteristics of the language of statistics are first, that it describes things in quantitative terms, and second, that it gives this description an air of accuracy and precision." (Ely Devons, "Essays in Economics", 1961)

"Relativity is inherently convergent, though convergent toward a plurality of centers of abstract truths. Degrees of accuracy are only degrees of refinement and magnitude in no way affects the fundamental reliability, which refers, as directional or angular sense, toward centralized truths. Truth is a relationship." (R Buckminster Fuller, "The Designers and the Politicians", 1962)

"Theories are usually introduced when previous study of a class of phenomena has revealed a system of uniformities. […] Theories then seek to explain those regularities and, generally, to afford a deeper and more accurate understanding of the phenomena in question. To this end, a theory construes those phenomena as manifestations of entities and processes that lie behind or beneath them, as it were." (Carl G Hempel, "Philosophy of Natural Science", 1966)

"Numbers are the product of counting. Quantities are the product of measurement. This means that numbers can conceivably be accurate because there is a discontinuity between each integer and the next. Between two and three there is a jump. In the case of quantity there is no such jump, and because jump is missing in the world of quantity it is impossible for any quantity to be exact. You can have exactly three tomatoes. You can never have exactly three gallons of water. Always quantity is approximate." (Gregory Bateson, "Number is Different from Quantity", CoEvolution Quarterly, 1978)

"Science has become a social method of inquiring into natural phenomena, making intuitive and systematic explorations of laws which are formulated by observing nature, and then rigorously testing their accuracy in the form of predictions. The results are then stored as written or mathematical records which are copied and disseminated to others, both within and beyond any given generation. As a sort of synergetic, rigorously regulated group perception, the collective enterprise of science far transcends the activity within an individual brain." (Lynn Margulis & Dorion Sagan, "Microcosmos", 1986)

"A theory is a good theory if it satisfies two requirements: it must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations." (Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time: From Big Bang To Black Holes", 1988)

"Science is (or should be) a precise art. Precise, because data may be taken or theories formulated with a certain amount of accuracy; an art, because putting the information into the most useful form for investigation or for presentation requires a certain amount of creativity and insight." (Patricia H Reiff, "The Use and Misuse of Statistics in Space Physics", Journal of Geomagnetism and Geoelectricity 42, 1990)

"There is no sharp dividing line between scientific theories and models, and mathematics is used similarly in both. The important thing is to possess a delicate judgement of the accuracy of your model or theory. An apparently crude model can often be surprisingly effective, in which case its plain dress should not mislead. In contrast, some apparently very good models can be hiding dangerous weaknesses." (David Wells, "You Are a Mathematician: A wise and witty introduction to the joy of numbers", 1995)

"Science is more than a mere attempt to describe nature as accurately as possible. Frequently the real message is well hidden, and a law that gives a poor approximation to nature has more significance than one which works fairly well but is poisoned at the root." (Robert H March, "Physics for Poets", 1996)

"Accuracy of observation is the equivalent of accuracy of thinking." (Wallace Stevens, "Collected Poetry and Prose", 1997)

“Accurate estimates depend at least as much upon the mental model used in forming the picture as upon the number of pieces of the puzzle that have been collected.” (Richards J. Heuer Jr, “Psychology of Intelligence Analysis”, 1999)

"To be numerate means to be competent, confident, and comfortable with one’s judgements on whether to use mathematics in a particular situation and if so, what mathematics to use, how to do it, what degree of accuracy is appropriate, and what the answer means in relation to the context." (Diana Coben, "Numeracy, mathematics and adult learning", 2000)

"Innumeracy - widespread confusion about basic mathematical ideas - means that many statistical claims about social problems don't get the critical attention they deserve. This is not simply because an innumerate public is being manipulated by advocates who cynically promote inaccurate statistics. Often, statistics about social problems originate with sincere, well-meaning people who are themselves innumerate; they may not grasp the full implications of what they are saying. Similarly, the media are not immune to innumeracy; reporters commonly repeat the figures their sources give them without bothering to think critically about them." (Joel Best, "Damned Lies and Statistics: Untangling Numbers from the Media, Politicians, and Activists", 2001)

"Most physical systems, particularly those complex ones, are extremely difficult to model by an accurate and precise mathematical formula or equation due to the complexity of the system structure, nonlinearity, uncertainty, randomness, etc. Therefore, approximate modeling is often necessary and practical in real-world applications. Intuitively, approximate modeling is always possible. However, the key questions are what kind of approximation is good, where the sense of 'goodness' has to be first defined, of course, and how to formulate such a good approximation in modeling a system such that it is mathematically rigorous and can produce satisfactory results in both theory and applications." (Guanrong Chen & Trung Tat Pham, "Introduction to Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Control Systems", 2001)

"There are two problems with sampling - one obvious, and  the other more subtle. The obvious problem is sample size. Samples tend to be much smaller than their populations. [...] Obviously, it is possible to question results based on small samples. The smaller the sample, the less confidence we have that the sample accurately reflects the population. However, large samples aren't necessarily good samples. This leads to the second issue: the representativeness of a sample is actually far more important than sample size. A good sample accurately reflects (or 'represents') the population." (Joel Best, "Damned Lies and Statistics: Untangling Numbers from the Media, Politicians, and Activists", 2001)

"[…] most earlier attempts to construct a theory of complexity have overlooked the deep link between it and networks. In most systems, complexity starts where networks turn nontrivial. No matter how puzzled we are by the behavior of an electron or an atom, we rarely call it complex, as quantum mechanics offers us the tools to describe them with remarkable accuracy. The demystification of crystals-highly regular networks of atoms and molecules-is one of the major success stories of twentieth-century physics, resulting in the development of the transistor and the discovery of superconductivity. Yet, we continue to struggle with systems for which the interaction map between the components is less ordered and rigid, hoping to give self-organization a chance." (Albert-László Barabási, "Linked: How Everything Is Connected to Everything Else and What It Means for Business, Science, and Everyday Life", 2002)

"Blissful data consist of information that is accurate, meaningful, useful, and easily accessible to many people in an organization. These data are used by the organization’s employees to analyze information and support their decision-making processes to strategic action. It is easy to see that organizations that have reached their goal of maximum productivity with blissful data can triumph over their competition. Thus, blissful data provide a competitive advantage.". (Margaret Y Chu, "Blissful Data", 2004)

"[…] we would like to observe that the butterfly effect lies at the root of many events which we call random. The final result of throwing a dice depends on the position of the hand throwing it, on the air resistance, on the base that the die falls on, and on many other factors. The result appears random because we are not able to take into account all of these factors with sufficient accuracy. Even the tiniest bump on the table and the most imperceptible move of the wrist affect the position in which the die finally lands. It would be reasonable to assume that chaos lies at the root of all random phenomena." (Iwo Bialynicki-Birula & Iwona Bialynicka-Birula, "Modeling Reality: How Computers Mirror Life", 2004)

"A scientific theory is a concise and coherent set of concepts, claims, and laws (frequently expressed mathematically) that can be used to precisely and accurately explain and predict natural phenomena." (Mordechai Ben-Ari, "Just a Theory: Exploring the Nature of Science", 2005)

"Coincidence surprises us because our intuition about the likelihood of an event is often wildly inaccurate." (Michael Starbird, "Coincidences, Chaos, and All That Math Jazz", 2005)

"[myth:] Accuracy is more important than precision. For single best estimates, be it a mean value or a single data value, this question does not arise because in that case there is no difference between accuracy and precision. (Think of a single shot aimed at a target.) Generally, it is good practice to balance precision and accuracy. The actual requirements will differ from case to case." (Manfred Drosg, "Dealing with Uncertainties: A Guide to Error Analysis", 2007)

"Humans have difficulty perceiving variables accurately […]. However, in general, they tend to have inaccurate perceptions of system states, including past, current, and future states. This is due, in part, to limited ‘mental models’ of the phenomena of interest in terms of both how things work and how to influence things. Consequently, people have difficulty determining the full implications of what is known, as well as considering future contingencies for potential systems states and the long-term value of addressing these contingencies. " (William B. Rouse, "People and Organizations: Explorations of Human-Centered Design", 2007) 

"Perception requires imagination because the data people encounter in their lives are never complete and always equivocal. [...] We also use our imagination and take shortcuts to fill gaps in patterns of nonvisual data. As with visual input, we draw conclusions and make judgments based on uncertain and incomplete information, and we conclude, when we are done analyzing the patterns, that out picture is clear and accurate. But is it?" (Leonard Mlodinow, "The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives", 2008)

"Prior to the discovery of the butterfly effect it was generally believed that small differences averaged out and were of no real significance. The butterfly effect showed that small things do matter. This has major implications for our notions of predictability, as over time these small differences can lead to quite unpredictable outcomes. For example, first of all, can we be sure that we are aware of all the small things that affect any given system or situation? Second, how do we know how these will affect the long-term outcome of the system or situation under study? The butterfly effect demonstrates the near impossibility of determining with any real degree of accuracy the long term outcomes of a series of events." (Elizabeth McMillan, Complexity, "Management and the Dynamics of Change: Challenges for practice", 2008)

"In the predictive modeling disciplines an ensemble is a group of algorithms that is used to solve a common problem [...] Each modeling algorithm has specific strengths and weaknesses and each provides a different mathematical perspective on the relationships modeled, just like each instrument in a musical ensemble provides a different voice in the composition. Predictive modeling ensembles use several algorithms to contribute their perspectives on the prediction problem and then combine them together in some way. Usually ensembles will provide more accurate models than individual algorithms which are also more general in their ability to work well on different data sets [...] the approach has proven to yield the best results in many situations." (Gary Miner et al, "Practical Text Mining and Statistical Analysis for Non-Structured Text Data Applications", 2012)

"The problem of complexity is at the heart of mankind’s inability to predict future events with any accuracy. Complexity science has demonstrated that the more factors found within a complex system, the more chances of unpredictable behavior. And without predictability, any meaningful control is nearly impossible. Obviously, this means that you cannot control what you cannot predict. The ability ever to predict long-term events is a pipedream. Mankind has little to do with changing climate; complexity does." (Lawrence K Samuels, "The Real Science Behind Changing Climate", 2014)

“A mathematical model is a mathematical description (often by means of a function or an equation) of a real-world phenomenon such as the size of a population, the demand for a product, the speed of a falling object, the concentration of a product in a chemical reaction, the life expectancy of a person at birth, or the cost of emission reductions. The purpose of the model is to understand the phenomenon and perhaps to make predictions about future behavior. [...] A mathematical model is never a completely accurate representation of a physical situation - it is an idealization." (James Stewart, “Calculus: Early Transcedentals” 8th Ed., 2016)

"Validity of a theory is also known as construct validity. Most theories in science present broad conceptual explanations of relationship between variables and make many different predictions about the relationships between particular variables in certain situations. Construct validity is established by verifying the accuracy of each possible prediction that might be made from the theory. Because the number of predictions is usually infinite, construct validity can never be fully established. However, the more independent predictions for the theory verified as accurate, the stronger the construct validity of the theory." (K  N Krishnaswamy et al, "Management Research Methodology: Integration of Principles, Methods and Techniques", 2016)

"The margin of error is how accurate the results are, and the confidence interval is how confident you are that your estimate falls within the margin of error." (Daniel J Levitin, "Weaponized Lies", 2017)

"Are your insights based on data that is accurate and reliable? Trustworthy data is correct or valid, free from significant defects and gaps. The trustworthiness of your data begins with the proper collection, processing, and maintenance of the data at its source. However, the reliability of your numbers can also be influenced by how they are handled during the analysis process. Clean data can inadvertently lose its integrity and true meaning depending on how it is analyzed and interpreted." (Brent Dykes, "Effective Data Storytelling: How to Drive Change with Data, Narrative and Visuals", 2019)

"The only way to achieve any accuracy is to ignore most of the information available." (Preston C Hammer) 

17 December 2018

🔭Data Science: Insight (Just the Quotes)

"[…] it is from long experience chiefly that we are to expect the most certain rules of practice, yet it is withal to be remembered, that observations, and to put us upon the most probable means of improving any art, is to get the best insight we can into the nature and properties of those things which we are desirous to cultivate and improve." (Stephen Hales, "Vegetable Staticks", 1727)

"The insights gained and garnered by the mind in its wanderings among basic concepts are benefits that theory can provide. Theory cannot equip the mind with formulas for solving problems, nor can it mark the narrow path on which the sole solution is supposed to lie by planting a hedge of principles on either side. But it can give the mind insight into the great mass of phenomena and of their relationships, then leave it free to rise into the higher realms of action." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"A law of nature, however, is not a mere logical conception that we have adopted as a kind of memoria technical to enable us to more readily remember facts. We of the present day have already sufficient insight to know that the laws of nature are not things which we can evolve by any speculative method. On the contrary, we have to discover them in the facts; we have to test them by repeated observation or experiment, in constantly new cases, under ever-varying circumstances; and in proportion only as they hold good under a constantly increasing change of conditions, in a constantly increasing number of cases with greater delicacy in the means of observation, does our confidence in their trustworthiness rise." (Hermann von Helmholtz, "Popular Lectures on Scientific Subjects", 1873)

"The attempt to characterize exactly models of an empirical theory almost inevitably yields a more precise and clearer understanding of the exact character of a theory. The emptiness and shallowness of many classical theories in the social sciences is well brought out by the attempt to formulate in any exact fashion what constitutes a model of the theory. The kind of theory which mainly consists of insightful remarks and heuristic slogans will not be amenable to this treatment. The effort to make it exact will at the same time reveal the weakness of the theory." (Patrick Suppes," A Comparison of the Meaning and Uses of Models in Mathematics and the Empirical Sciences", Synthese  Vol. 12 (2/3), 1960)

"Model-making, the imaginative and logical steps which precede the experiment, may be judged the most valuable part of scientific method because skill and insight in these matters are rare. Without them we do not know what experiment to do. But it is the experiment which provides the raw material for scientific theory. Scientific theory cannot be built directly from the conclusions of conceptual models." (Herbert G Andrewartha," Introduction to the Study of Animal Population", 1961)

"The purpose of computing is insight, not numbers […] sometimes […] the purpose of computing numbers is not yet in sight." (Richard Hamming, "Numerical Methods for Scientists and Engineers", 1962)

"The mediation of theory and praxis can only be clarified if to begin with we distinguish three functions, which are measured in terms of different criteria: the formation and extension of critical theorems, which can stand up to scientific discourse; the organization of processes of enlightenment, in which such theorems are applied and can be tested in a unique manner by the initiation of processes of reflection carried on within certain groups toward which these processes have been directed; and the selection of appropriate strategies, the solution of tactical questions, and the conduct of the political struggle. On the first level, the aim is true statements, on the second, authentic insights, and on the third, prudent decisions." (Jürgen Habermas, "Introduction to Theory and Practice", 1963)

"[...] it is rather more difficult to recapture directness and simplicity than to advance in the direction of ever more sophistication and complexity. Any third-rate engineer or researcher can increase complexity; but it takes a certain flair of real insight to make things simple again." (Ernst F Schumacher, "Small Is Beautiful", 1973)

"Every discovery, every enlargement of the understanding, begins as an imaginative preconception of what the truth might be. The imaginative preconception - a ‘hypothesis’ - arises by a process as easy or as difficult to understand as any other creative act of mind; it is a brainwave, an inspired guess, a product of a blaze of insight. It comes anyway from within and cannot be achieved by the exercise of any known calculus of discovery." (Sir Peter B Medawar, "Advice to a Young Scientist", 1979)

"There is a tendency to mistake data for wisdom, just as there has always been a tendency to confuse logic with values, intelligence with insight. Unobstructed access to facts can produce unlimited good only if it is matched by the desire and ability to find out what they mean and where they lead." (Norman Cousins, "Human Options : An Autobiographical Notebook", 1981)

"The heart of mathematics consists of concrete examples and concrete problems. Big general theories are usually afterthoughts based on small but profound insights; the insights themselves come from concrete special cases." (Paul Halmos, "Selecta: Expository writing", 1983)

"All the efforts of the researcher to find other models, conceptions, different mathematical forms, better linguistic modes of expression, to do justice to newly discovered layers of being mean self-transformation. The researcher in his place is the human being in self-transformation to more profound insight into what is given." (John Dessauer, Universitas: A Quarterly German Review of the Arts and Sciences Vol. 26 (4), 1984)

"[…] new insights fail to get put into practice because they conflict with deeply held internal images of how the world works [...] images that limit us to familiar ways of thinking and acting. That is why the discipline of managing mental models - surfacing, testing, and improving our internal pictures of how the world works - promises to be a major breakthrough for learning organizations." (Peter Senge, "The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization", 1990)

"Science is (or should be) a precise art. Precise, because data may be taken or theories formulated with a certain amount of accuracy; an art, because putting the information into the most useful form for investigation or for presentation requires a certain amount of creativity and insight." (Patricia H Reiff, "The Use and Misuse of Statistics in Space Physics", Journal of Geomagnetism and Geoelectricity 42, 1990)

"Management is not founded on observation and experiment, but on a drive towards a set of outcomes. These aims are not altogether explicit; at one extreme they may amount to no more than an intention to preserve the status quo, at the other extreme they may embody an obsessional demand for power, profit or prestige. But the scientist's quest for insight, for understanding, for wanting to know what makes the system tick, rarely figures in the manager's motivation. Secondly, and therefore, management is not, even in intention, separable from its own intentions and desires: its policies express them. Thirdly, management is not normally aware of the conventional nature of its intellectual processes and control procedures. It is accustomed to confuse its conventions for recording information with truths-about-the-business, its subjective institutional languages for discussing the business with an objective language of fact and its models of reality with reality itself." (Stanford Beer, "Decision and Control", 1994)

"Ideas about organization are always based on implicit images or metaphors that persuade us to see, understand, and manage situations in a particular way. Metaphors create insight. But they also distort. They have strengths. But they also have limitations. In creating ways of seeing, they create ways of not seeing. There can be no single theory or metaphor that gives an all-purpose point of view, and there can be no simple 'correct theory' for structuring everything we do." (Gareth Morgan, "Imaginization", 1997)

"We use mathematics and statistics to describe the diverse realms of randomness. From these descriptions, we attempt to glean insights into the workings of chance and to search for hidden causes. With such tools in hand, we seek patterns and relationships and propose predictions that help us make sense of the world."  (Ivars Peterson, "The Jungles of Randomness: A Mathematical Safari", 1998)

"The purpose of analysis is insight. The best analysis is the simplest analysis which provides the needed insight." (Donald J Wheeler, "Understanding Variation: The Key to Managing Chaos" 2nd Ed., 2000)

"A model is an imitation of reality and a mathematical model is a particular form of representation. We should never forget this and get so distracted by the model that we forget the real application which is driving the modelling. In the process of model building we are translating our real world problem into an equivalent mathematical problem which we solve and then attempt to interpret. We do this to gain insight into the original real world situation or to use the model for control, optimization or possibly safety studies." (Ian T Cameron & Katalin Hangos, "Process Modelling and Model Analysis", 2001)

"Central tendency is the formal expression for the notion of where data is centered, best understood by most readers as 'average'. There is no one way of measuring where data are centered, and different measures provide different insights." (Charles Livingston & Paul Voakes, "Working with Numbers and Statistics: A handbook for journalists", 2005)

"A common mistake is that all visualization must be simple, but this skips a step. You should actually design graphics that lend clarity, and that clarity can make a chart 'simple' to read. However, sometimes a dataset is complex, so the visualization must be complex. The visualization might still work if it provides useful insights that you wouldn’t get from a spreadsheet. […] Sometimes a table is better. Sometimes it’s better to show numbers instead of abstract them with shapes. Sometimes you have a lot of data, and it makes more sense to visualize a simple aggregate than it does to show every data point." (Nathan Yau, "Data Points: Visualization That Means Something", 2013)

"The other buzzword that epitomizes a bias toward substitution is 'big data'. Today’s companies have an insatiable appetite for data, mistakenly believing that more data always creates more value. But big data is usually dumb data. Computers can find patterns that elude humans, but they don’t know how to compare patterns from different sources or how to interpret complex behaviors. Actionable insights can only come from a human analyst (or the kind of generalized artificial intelligence that exists only in science fiction)." (Peter Thiel & Blake Masters, "Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future", 2014)

"As business leaders we need to understand that lack of data is not the issue. Most businesses have more than enough data to use constructively; we just don't know how to use it. The reality is that most businesses are already data rich, but insight poor." (Bernard Marr, Big Data: Using SMART Big Data, Analytics and Metrics To Make Better Decisions and Improve Performance, 2015)

"While Big Data, when managed wisely, can provide important insights, many of them will be disruptive. After all, it aims to find patterns that are invisible to human eyes. The challenge for data scientists is to understand the ecosystems they are wading into and to present not just the problems but also their possible solutions." (Cathy O'Neil, "Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy", 2016)

"Big Data allows us to meaningfully zoom in on small segments of a dataset to gain new insights on who we are." (Seth Stephens-Davidowitz, "Everybody Lies: What the Internet Can Tell Us About Who We Really Are", 2017)

"Mathematical modeling is the modern version of both applied mathematics and theoretical physics. In earlier times, one proposed not a model but a theory. By talking today of a model rather than a theory, one acknowledges that the way one studies the phenomenon is not unique; it could also be studied other ways. One's model need not claim to be unique or final. It merits consideration if it provides an insight that isn't better provided by some other model." (Reuben Hersh, ”Mathematics as an Empirical Phenomenon, Subject to Modeling”, 2017)

"Quantum Machine Learning is defined as the branch of science and technology that is concerned with the application of quantum mechanical phenomena such as superposition, entanglement and tunneling for designing software and hardware to provide machines the ability to learn insights and patterns from data and the environment, and the ability to adapt automatically to changing situations with high precision, accuracy and speed." (Amit Ray, "Quantum Computing Algorithms for Artificial Intelligence", 2018)

"The goal of data science is to improve decision making by basing decisions on insights extracted from large data sets. As a field of activity, data science encompasses a set of principles, problem definitions, algorithms, and processes for extracting nonobvious and useful patterns from large data sets. It is closely related to the fields of data mining and machine learning, but it is broader in scope. (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"The patterns that we extract using data science are useful only if they give us insight into the problem that enables us to do something to help solve the problem." (John D Kelleher & Brendan Tierney, "Data Science", 2018)

"A random collection of interesting but disconnected facts will lack the unifying theme to become a data story - it may be informative, but it won’t be insightful." (Brent Dykes, "Effective Data Storytelling: How to Drive Change with Data, Narrative and Visuals", 2019)

"An essential underpinning of both the kaizen and lean methodologies is data. Without data, companies using these approaches simply wouldn’t know what to improve or whether their incremental changes were successful. Data provides the clarity and specificity that’s often needed to drive positive change. The importance of having baselines, benchmarks, and targets isn’t isolated to just business; it can transcend everything from personal development to social causes. The right insight can instill both the courage and confidence to forge a new direction - turning a leap of faith into an informed expedition." (Brent Dykes, "Effective Data Storytelling: How to Drive Change with Data, Narrative and Visuals", 2019)

"An insight is when you mix your creative and intellectual labor with a set of data points to create a point of view resulting in a useful assertion. You 'see into' an object of inquiry to reveal important characteristics about its nature." (Eben Hewitt, "Technology Strategy Patterns: Architecture as strategy" 2nd Ed., 2019)

"An essential underpinning of both the kaizen and lean methodologies is data. Without data, companies using these approaches simply wouldn’t know what to improve or whether their incremental changes were successful. Data provides the clarity and specificity that’s often needed to drive positive change. The importance of having baselines, benchmarks, and targets isn’t isolated to just business; it can transcend everything from personal development to social causes. The right insight can instill both the courage and confidence to forge a new direction - turning a leap of faith into an informed expedition." (Brent Dykes, "Effective Data Storytelling: How to Drive Change with Data, Narrative and Visuals", 2019)

"Before you can even consider creating a data story, you must have a meaningful insight to share. One of the essential attributes of a data story is a central or main insight. Without a main point, your data story will lack purpose, direction, and cohesion. A central insight is the unifying theme (telos appeal) that ties your various findings together and guides your audience to a focal point or climax for your data story. However, when you have an increasing amount of data at your disposal, insights can be elusive. The noise from irrelevant and peripheral data can interfere with your ability to pinpoint the important signals hidden within its core." (Brent Dykes, "Effective Data Storytelling: How to Drive Change with Data, Narrative and Visuals", 2019)

"Data storytelling is transformative. Many people don’t realize that when they share insights, they’re not just imparting information to other people. The natural consequence of sharing an insight is change. Stop doing that, and do more of this. Focus less on them, and concentrate more on these people. Spend less there, and invest more here. A poignant insight will drive an enlightened audience to think or act differently. So, as a data storyteller, you’re not only guiding the audience through the data, you’re also acting as a change agent. Rather than just pointing out possible enhancements, you’re helping your audience fully understand the urgency of the changes and giving them the confidence to move forward." (Brent Dykes, "Effective Data Storytelling: How to Drive Change with Data, Narrative and Visuals", 2019)

"Some problems are just too complicated for rational logical solutions. They admit of insights, not answers." (Jerome B Wiesner)

12 December 2018

🔭Data Science: Theory (Just the Quotes)

"The moment a person forms a theory, his imagination sees, in every object, only the traits which favor that theory." (Thomas Jefferson, [letter to Charles Thompson] 1787)

"It is not possible to feel satisfied at having said the last word about some theory as long as it cannot be explained in a few words to any passerby encountered in the street." (Joseph D Gergonne, [letter] 1825)

"[…] in order to observe, our mind has need of some theory or other. If in contemplating phenomena we did not immediately connect them with principles, not only would it be impossible for us to combine these isolated observations, and therefore to derive profit from them, but we should even be entirely incapable of remembering facts, which would for the most remain unnoted by us." (Auguste Comte, "Cours de Philosophie Positive", 1830-1842)

"[Precision] is the very soul of science; and its attainment afford the only criterion, or at least the best, of the truth of theories, and the correctness of experiments." (John F W Herschel, "A Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy", 1830)

"The function of theory is to put all this in systematic order, clearly and comprehensively, and to trace each action to an adequate, compelling cause. […] Theory should cast a steady light on all phenomena so that we can more easily recognize and eliminate the weeds that always spring from ignorance; it should show how one thing is related to another, and keep the important and the unimportant separate. If concepts combine of their own accord to form that nucleus of truth we call a principle, if they spontaneously compose a pattern that becomes a rule, it is the task of the theorist to make this clear." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"The insights gained and garnered by the mind in its wanderings among basic concepts are benefits that theory can provide. Theory cannot equip the mind with formulas for solving problems, nor can it mark the narrow path on which the sole solution is supposed to lie by planting a hedge of principles on either side. But it can give the mind insight into the great mass of phenomena and of their relationships, then leave it free to rise into the higher realms of action." (Carl von Clausewitz, "On War", 1832)

"Theories usually result from the precipitate reasoning of an impatient mind which would like to be rid of phenomena and replace them with images, concepts, indeed often with mere words." (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, "Maxims and Reflections", 1833)

"Every detection of what is false directs us towards what is true: every trial exhausts some tempting form of error. Not only so; but scarcely any attempt is entirely a failure; scarcely any theory, the result of steady thought, is altogether false; no tempting form of error is without some latent charm derived from truth." (William Whewell, "Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy in England", 1852)

"The dimmed outlines of phenomenal things all merge into one another unless we put on the focusing-glass of theory, and screw it up sometimes to one pitch of definition and sometimes to another, so as to see down into different depths through the great millstone of the world." (James C Maxwell, "Are There Real Analogies in Nature?", 1856) 

"[…] ideas may be both novel and important, and yet, if they are incorrect – if they lack the very essential support of incontrovertible fact, they are unworthy of credence. Without this, a theory may be both beautiful and grand, but must be as evanescent as it is beautiful, and as unsubstantial as it is grand." (George Brewster, "A New Philosophy of Matter", 1858)

"If an idea presents itself to us, we must not reject it simply because it does not agree with the logical deductions of a reigning theory." (Claude Bernard, "An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine", 1865)

"Science asks no questions about the ontological pedigree or a priori character of a theory, but is content to judge it by its performance; and it is thus that a knowledge of nature, having all the certainty which the senses are competent to inspire, has been attained - a knowledge which maintains a strict neutrality toward all philosophical systems and concerns itself not with the genesis or a priori grounds of ideas." (Chauncey Wright, "The Philosophy of Herbert Spencer", North American Review, 1865)

"Isolated facts and experiments have in themselves no value, however great their number may be. They only become valuable in a theoretical or practical point of view when they make us acquainted with the law of a series of uniformly recurring phenomena, or, it may be, only give a negative result showing an incompleteness in our knowledge of such a law, till then held to be perfect." (Hermann von Helmholtz, "The Aim and Progress of Physical Science", 1869)

"The triumph of a theory is to embrace the greatest number and the greatest variety of facts." (Charles A Wurtz, "A History of Chemical Theory from the Age of Lavoisier to the Present Time", 1869)

"Mathematics is not the discoverer of laws, for it is not induction; neither is it the framer of theories, for it is not hypothesis; but it is the judge over both, and it is the arbiter to which each must refer its claims; and neither law can rule nor theory explain without the sanction of mathematics." (Benjamin Peirce, "Linear Associative Algebra", American Journal of Mathematics, Vol. 4, 1881)

"As for everything else, so for a mathematical theory: beauty can be perceived but not explained." (Arthur Cayley, [president's address] 1883)

"It would be an error to suppose that the great discoverer seizes at once upon the truth, or has any unerring method of divining it. In all probability the errors of the great mind exceed in number those of the less vigorous one. Fertility of imagination and abundance of guesses at truth are among the first requisites of discovery; but the erroneous guesses must be many times as numerous as those that prove well founded. The weakest analogies, the most whimsical notions, the most apparently absurd theories, may pass through the teeming brain, and no record remain of more than the hundredth part. […] The truest theories involve suppositions which are inconceivable, and no limit can really be placed to the freedom of hypotheses." (W Stanley Jevons, "The Principles of Science: A Treatise on Logic and Scientific Method", 1877)

"Perfect readiness to reject a theory inconsistent with fact is a primary requisite of the philosophic mind. But it, would be a mistake to suppose that this candour has anything akin to fickleness; on the contrary, readiness to reject a false theory may be combined with a peculiar pertinacity and courage in maintaining an hypothesis as long as its falsity is not actually apparent." (William S Jevons, "The Principles of Science", 1887)

"The history of thought should warn us against concluding that because the scientific theory of the world is the best that has yet been formulated, it is necessarily complete and final. We must remember that at bottom the generalizations of science or, in common parlance, the laws of nature are merely hypotheses devised to explain that ever-shifting phantasmagoria of thought which we dignify with the high-sounding names of the world and the universe." (Sir James G Frazer, "The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion", 1890) 

"One is almost tempted to assert that quite apart from its intellectual mission, theory is the most practical thing conceivable, the quintessence of practice as it were, since the precision of its conclusions cannot be reached by any routine of estimating or trial and error; although given the hidden ways of theory, this will hold only for those who walk them with complete confidence." (Ludwig E Boltzmann, "On the Significance of Theories", 1890) 

"Facts are not much use, considered as facts. They bewilder by their number and their apparent incoherency. Let them be digested into theory, however, and brought into mutual harmony, and it is another matter. Theory is of the essence of facts. Without theory scientific knowledge would be only worthy of the mad house." (Oliver Heaviside, "Electromagnetic Theory", 1893)

"Scientific facts accumulate rapidly, and give rise to theories with almost equal rapidity. These theories are often wonderfully enticing, and one is apt to pass from one to another, from theory to theory, without taking care to establish each before passing on to the next, without assuring oneself that the foundation on which one is building is secure. Then comes the crash; the last theory breaks down utterly, and on attempting to retrace our steps to firm ground and start anew, we may find too late that one of the cards, possibly at the very foundation of the pagoda, is either faultily placed or in itself defective, and that this blemish easily remedied if detected in time has, neglected, caused the collapse of the whole structure on whose erection so much skill and perseverance have been spent." (Arthur M Marshall, 1894)

"A mathematical theory is not to be considered complete until you have made it so clear that you can explain it to the first man whom you meet on the street." (David Hilbert [paraphrasing Joseph D Gergonne], "Mathematical Problems", 1900)

"One does not ask whether a scientific theory is true, but only whether it is convenient." (Henri Poincaré, "La Science et l'Hypothèse", 1902) 

"But surely it is self-evident that every theory is merely a framework or scheme of concepts together with their necessary relations to one another, and that the basic elements can be constructed as one pleases." (Gottlob Frege, "On the Foundations of Geometry and Formal Theories of Arithmetic" , cca. 1903-1909)

"It [a theory] ought to furnish a compass which, if followed, will lead the observer further and further into previously unexplored regions. Whether these regions will be barren or fertile experience alone will decide; but, at any rate, one who is guided in this way will travel onward in a definite direction, and will not wander aimlessly to and fro." (Sir Joseph J Thomson, "The Corpuscular Theory of Matter", 1907)

"Things and events explain themselves, and the business of thought is to brush aside the verbal and conceptual impediments which prevent them from doing so. Start with the notion that it is you who explain the Object, and not the Object that explains itself, and you are bound to end in explaining it away. It ceases to exist, its place being taken by a parcel of concepts, a string of symbols, a form of words, and you find yourself contemplating, not the thing, but your theory of the thing." (Lawrence P Jacks, "The Usurpation Of Language", 1910)

"The existence of analogies between central features of various theories implies the existence of a general theory which underlies the particular theories and unifies them with respect to those central features." (Eliakim H Moore, "Introduction to a Form of General Analysis", 1910)

"The discovery which has been pointed to by theory is always one of profound interest and importance, but it is usually the close and crown of a long and fruitful period, whereas the discovery which comes as a puzzle and surprise usually marks a fresh epoch and opens a new chapter in science." (Sir Oliver J Lodge, [Becquerel Memorial Lecture] Journal of the Chemical Society, Transactions 101 (2), 1912) 

"There is no great harm in the theorist who makes up a new theory to fit a new event. But the theorist who starts with a false theory and then sees everything as making it come true is the most dangerous enemy of human reason." (Gilbert K Chesterton, "The Flying Inn", 1914)

"Theory is the best guide for experiment - that were it not for theory and the problems and hypotheses that come out of it, we would not know the points we wanted to verify, and hence would experiment aimlessly" (Henry Hazlitt,  "Thinking as a Science", 1916)

"As soon as science has emerged from its initial stages, theoretical advances are no longer achieved merely by a process of arrangement. Guided by empirical data, the investigator rather develops a system of thought which, in general, is built up logically from a small number of fundamental assumptions, the so-called axioms. We call such a system of thought a theory. The theory finds the justification for its existence in the fact that it correlates a large number of single observations, and it is just here that the 'truth' of the theory lies." (Albert Einstein: "Relativity: The Special and General Theory", 1916)

"No fairer destiny could be allotted to any physical theory, than that it should of itself point out the way to the introduction of a more comprehensive theory, in which it lives on as a limiting case." (Albert Einstein: "Relativity, The Special and General Theory", 1916)

"To come very near to a true theory, and to grasp its precise application, are two very different things, as the history of a science teaches us. Everything of importance has been said before by somebody who did not discover it." (Alfred N Whitehead, "The Organization of Thought", 1917)

"Facts are carpet-tacks under the pneumatic tires of theory." (Austin O’Malley, "Keystones of Thought", 1918)

"Philosophy, like science, consists of theories or insights arrived at as a result of systemic reflection or reasoning in regard to the data of experience. It involves, therefore, the analysis of experience and the synthesis of the results of analysis into a comprehensive or unitary conception. Philosophy seeks a totality and harmony of reasoned insight into the nature and meaning of all the principal aspects of reality." (Joseph A Leighton, "The Field of Philosophy: An outline of lectures on introduction to philosophy", 1919)

"[…] analogies are not ‘aids’ to the establishment of theories; they are an utterly essential part of theories, without which theories would be completely valueless and unworthy of the name. It is often suggested that the analogy leads to the formulation of the theory, but that once the theory is formulated the analogy has served its purpose and may be removed or forgotten. Such a suggestion is absolutely false and perniciously misleading." (Norman R Campbell, "Physics, the Elements", 1920) 

"Nothing is more interesting to the true theorist than a fact which directly contradicts a theory generally accepted up to that time, for this is his particular work." (Max Planck, "A Survey of Physics", 1925)

"[…] the mere collection of facts, without some basis of theory for guidance and elucidation, is foolish and profitless." (Gamaliel Bradford, "Darwin", 1926)

"[…] facts are too bulky to be lugged about conveniently except on the wheels of theory." (Julian Huxley, "Essays of a Biologist", 1929)

 "We can invent as many theories we like, and any one of them can be made to fit the facts. But that theory is always preferred which makes the fewest number of assumptions." (Albert Einstein [interview] 1929)

"Every theory of the course of events in nature is necessarily based on some process of simplification and is to some extent, therefore, a fairy tale." (Sir Napier Shaw, "Manual of Meteorology", 1932)

"[…] the process of scientific discovery may be regarded as a form of art. This is best seen in the theoretical aspects of Physical Science. The mathematical theorist builds up on certain assumptions and according to well understood logical rules, step by step, a stately edifice, while his imaginative power brings out clearly the hidden relations between its parts. A well-constructed theory is in some respects undoubtedly an artistic production." (Ernest Rutherford, 1932)

"It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience." (Albert Einstein, [lecture] 1933)

"All the theories and hypotheses of empirical science share this provisional character of being established and accepted ‘until further notice’ [...]" (Carl G Hempel, "Geometry and Empirical Science", 1935)

"[while] the traditional way is to regard the facts of science as something like the parts of a jig-saw puzzle, which can be fitted together in one and only one way, I regard them rather as the tiny pieces of a mosaic, which can be fitted together in many ways. A new theory in an old subject is, for me, a new mosaic pattern made with the pieces taken from an older pattern. [...] Theories come into fashion and theories go out of fashion, but the facts connected with them stay." (William H George, "The Scientist in Action", 1936)

"Every new theory as it arises believes in the flush of youth that it has the long sought goal; it sees no limits to its applicability, and believes that at last it is the fortunate theory to achieve the 'right' answer." (Percy W Bridgman, "The Nature of Physical Theory", 1936)

"When an active individual of sound common sense perceives the sordid state of the world, desire to change it becomes the guiding principle by which he organizes given facts and shapes them into a theory. The methods and categories as well as the transformation of the theory can be understood only in connection with his taking of sides. This, in turn, discloses both his sound common sense and the character of the world. Right thinking depends as much on right willing as right willing on right thinking." (Max Horkheimer, "The Latest Attack on Metaphysics", 1937)

"Creating a new theory is not like destroying an old barn and erecting a skyscraper in its place. It is rather like climbing a mountain, gaining new and wider views, discovering unexpected connections between our starting point and its rich environment. But the point from which we started out still exists and can be seen, although it appears smaller and forms a tiny part of our broad view gained by the mastery of the obstacles on our adventurous way up." (Albert Einstein & Leopold Infeld, "The Evolution of Physics", 1938)

"With the help of physical theories we try to find our way through the maze of observed facts, to order and understand the world of our sense impressions." (Albert Einstein & Leopold Infeld, "The Evolution of Physics", 1938)

"There is nothing as practical as a good theory" (Kurt Z Lewin, "Psychology and the process of group living", Journal of Social Psychology 17, 1943)

"To a scientist a theory is something to be tested. He seeks not to defend his beliefs, but to improve them. He is, above everything else, an expert at ‘changing his mind’." (Wendell Johnson, 1946)

"One expects a mathematical theorem or a mathematical theory not only to describe and to classify in a simple and elegant way numerous and a priori disparate special cases. One also expects ‘elegance’ in its ‘architectural’ structural makeup." (John von Neumann, "The Mathematician" [in "Works of the Mind" Vol. I (1), 1947]) 

"We can put it down as one of the principles learned from the history of science that a theory is only overthrown by a better theory, never merely by contradictory facts." (James B Conant, "On Understanding Science", 1947)

"A theory is the more impressive the greater the simplicity of its premises is, the more different kinds of things it relates, and the more extended its area of applicability." (Albert Einstein, "Autobiographical Notes", 1949)

"When a scientific theory is firmly established and confirmed, it changes its character and becomes a part of the metaphysical background of the age: a doctrine is transformed into a dogma." (Max Born, "Natural Philosophy of Cause and Chance", 1949)

"As every mathematician knows, nothing is more fruitful than these obscure analogies, these indistinct reflections of one theory into another, these furtive caresses, these inexplicable disagreements; also nothing gives the researcher greater pleasure." (André Weil, "De la Métaphysique aux Mathématiques", 1960)

"A theory with mathematical beauty is more likely to be correct than an ugly one that fits some experimental data. " (Paul A M Dirac, Scientific American, 1963)

"The final test of a theory is its capacity to solve the problems which originated it." (George Dantzig, "Linear Programming and Extensions", 1963)

"It is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every theory - if we look for confirmations. Confirmations should count only if they are the result of risky predictions. […] A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice. Every genuine test of a theory is an attempt to falsify it, or refute it." (Karl R Popper, "Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge", 1963)

"One of the endlessly alluring aspects of mathematics is that its thorniest paradoxes have a way of blooming into beautiful theories." (Philip J Davis, "Number", Scientific American, No 211 (3), 1964)

"Another thing I must point out is that you cannot prove a vague theory wrong. If the guess that you make is poorly expressed and rather vague, and the method that you use for figuring out the consequences is a little vague - you are not sure, and you say, 'I think everything's right because it's all due to so and so, and such and such do this and that more or less, and I can sort of explain how this works' […] then you see that this theory is good, because it cannot be proved wrong! Also if the process of computing the consequences is indefinite, then with a little skill any experimental results can be made to look like the expected consequences." (Richard P Feynman, "The Character of Physical Law", 1965)

"This is the key of modern science and it was the beginning of the true understanding of Nature - this idea to look at the thing, to record the details, and to hope that in the information thus obtained might lie a clue to one or another theoretical interpretation." (Richard P Feynman, "The Character of Physical Law", 1965)

"Theories are usually introduced when previous study of a class of phenomena has revealed a system of uniformities. […] Theories then seek to explain those regularities and, generally, to afford a deeper and more accurate understanding of the phenomena in question. To this end, a theory construes those phenomena as manifestations of entities and processes that lie behind or beneath them, as it were." (Carl G Hempel, "Philosophy of Natural Science", 1966)

"A theory is scientific only if it can be disproved. But the moment you try to cover absolutely everything the chances are that you cover nothing. " (Sir Hermann Bondi, "Assumption and Myth in Physical Theory", 1967) 

 "As soon as we inquire into the reasons for the phenomena, we enter the domain of theory, which connects the observed phenomena and traces them back to a single ‘pure’ phenomena, thus bringing about a logical arrangement of an enormous amount of observational material." (Georg Joos, "Theoretical Physics", 1968)

"It makes no sense to say what the objects of a theory are, beyond saying how to interpret or reinterpret that theory in another." (Willard v O Quine, "Ontological Relativity and Other Essays", 1969)

"One often hears that successive theories grow ever closer to, or approximate more and more closely to, the truth. Apparently, generalizations like that refer not to the puzzle-solutions and the concrete predictions derived from a theory but rather to its ontology, to the match, that is, between the entities with which the theory populates nature and what is ‘really there’." (Thomas S Kuhn, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions", 1970)

"Blind commitment to a theory is not an intellectual virtue: it is an intellectual crime." (Imre Lakatos, [radio Lecture] 1973) 

"No theory ever agrees with all the facts in its domain, yet it is not always the theory that is to blame. Facts are constituted by older ideologies, and a clash between facts and theories may be proof of progress. It is also a first step in our attempt to find the principles implicit in familiar observational notions." (Paul K Feyerabend, "Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge", 1975) 

"A physical theory remains an empty shell until we have found a reasonable physical interpretation." (Peter Bergmann, [conference] 1976)

"Owing to his lack of knowledge, the ordinary man cannot attempt to resolve conflicting theories of conflicting advice into a single organized structure. He is likely to assume the information available to him is on the order of what we might think of as a few pieces of an enormous jigsaw puzzle. If a given piece fails to fit, it is not because it is fraudulent; more likely the contradictions and inconsistencies within his information are due to his lack of understanding and to the fact that he possesses only a few pieces of the puzzle. Differing statements about the nature of things […] are to be collected eagerly and be made a part of the individual's collection of puzzle pieces. Ultimately, after many lifetimes, the pieces will fit together and the individual will attain clear and certain knowledge." (Alan R Beals, "Strategies of Resort to Curers in South India" [contributed in Charles M. Leslie (ed.), "Asian Medical Systems: A Comparative Study", 1976]) 

"A good scientific law or theory is falsifiable just because it makes definite claims about the world. For the falsificationist, If follows fairly readily from this that the more falsifiable a theory is the better, in some loose sense of more. The more a theory claims, the more potential opportunities there will be for showing that the world does not in fact behave in the way laid down by the theory. A very good theory will be one that makes very wide-ranging claims about the world, and which is consequently highly falsifiable, and is one that resists falsification whenever it is put to the test." (Alan F Chalmers,  "What Is This Thing Called Science?", 1976)

"Facts do not ‘speak for themselves’; they are read in the light of theory. Creative thought, in science as much as in the arts, is the motor of changing opinion. Science is a quintessentially human activity, not a mechanized, robot-like accumulation of objective information, leading by laws of logic to inescapable interpretation." (Stephen J Gould, "Ever Since Darwin", 1977)

"Our mistake is not that we take our theories too seriously, but that we do not take them seriously enough. It is always hard to realize that these numbers and equations we play with at our desks have something to do with the real world." (Steven Weinberg, "The First Three Minutes", 1977)

"The theory of our modern technic shows that nothing is as practical as the theory." (J Robert Oppenheimer, "Reflex", 1977)

"Science has so accustomed us to devising and accepting theories to account for the facts we observe, however fantastic, that our minds must begin their manufacture before we are aware of it." (Gene Wolfe, "Seven American Nights", 1978) 

"For mathematicians, only one test was necessary: once the elements of any mathematical theory were seen to be consistent, then they were mathematically acceptable. Nothing more was required." (Joseph W  Dauben, "Georg Cantor: His Mathematics and Philosophy of the Infinite", 1979)

"Science, since people must do it, is a socially embedded activity. It progresses by hunch, vision, and intuition. Much of its change through time does not record a closer approach to absolute truth, but the alteration of cultural contexts that influence it so strongly. Facts are not pure and unsullied bits of information; culture also influences what we see and how we see it. Theories, moreover, are not inexorable inductions from facts. The most creative theories are often imaginative visions imposed upon facts; the source of imagination is also strongly cultural." (Stephen J Gould, "The Mismeasure of Man", 1980)

"Facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away while scientists debate rival theories for explaining them." (Stephen J Gould "Evolution as Fact and Theory", 1981)

"A real change of theory is not a change of equations - it is a change of mathematical structure, and only fragments of competing theories, often not very important ones conceptually, admit comparison with each other within a limited range of phenomena." (Yuri I Manin, "Mathematics and Physics", 1981)

"The principal aim of physical theories is understanding. A theory's ability to find a number is merely a useful criterion for a correct understanding." (Yuri I Manin, "Mathematics and Physics", 1981)

"Data in isolation are meaningless, a collection of numbers. Only in context of a theory do they assume significance […]" (George Greenstein, "Frozen Star", 1983)

"In all scientific fields, theory is frequently more important than experimental data. Scientists are generally reluctant to accept the existence of a phenomenon when they do not know how to explain it. On the other hand, they will often accept a theory that is especially plausible before there exists any data to support it." (Richard Morris, 1983) 

"Physics is like that. It is important that the models we construct allow us to draw the right conclusions about the behaviour of the phenomena and their causes. But it is not essential that the models accurately describe everything that actually happens; and in general it will not be possible for them to do so, and for much the same reasons. The requirements of the theory constrain what can be literally represented. This does not mean that the right lessons cannot be drawn. Adjustments are made where literal correctness does not matter very much in order to get the correct effects where we want them; and very often, as in the staging example, one distortion is put right by another. That is why it often seems misleading to say that a particular aspect of a model is false to reality: given the other constraints that is just the way to restore the representation." (Nancy Cartwright, "How the Laws of Physics Lie", 1983)

"Scientific theories must tell us both what is true in nature, and how we are to explain it. […] Scientific theories are thought to explain by dint of the descriptions they give of reality." (Nancy Cartwright, "How the Laws of Physics Lie", 1983)

"The heart of mathematics consists of concrete examples and concrete problems. Big general theories are usually afterthoughts based on small but profound insights; the insights themselves come from concrete special cases." (Paul Halmos, "Selecta: Expository writing", 1983)

"A final goal of any scientific theory must be the derivation of numbers. Theories stand or fall, ultimately, upon numbers." (Richard E Bellman, "Eye of the Hurricane: An Autobiography", 1984)

"Until now, physical theories have been regarded as merely models with approximately describe the reality of nature. As the models improve, so the fit between theory and reality gets closer. Some physicists are now claiming that supergravity is the reality, that the model and the real world are in mathematically perfect accord." (Paul C W Davies, "Superforce", 1984)

"Nature is disordered, powerful and chaotic, and through fear of the chaos we impose system on it. We abhor complexity, and seek to simplify things whenever we can by whatever means we have at hand. We need to have an overall explanation of what the universe is and how it functions. In order to achieve this overall view we develop explanatory theories which will give structure to natural phenomena: we classify nature into a coherent system which appears to do what we say it does." (James Burke, "The Day the Universe Changed", 1985) 

"Experience without theory teaches nothing." (William E Deming, "Out of the Crisis", 1986)

"All great theories are expansive, and all notions so rich in scope and implication are underpinned by visions about the nature of things. You may call these visions ‘philosophy’, or ‘metaphor’, or ‘organizing principle’, but one thing they are surely not - they are not simple inductions from observed facts of the natural world." (Stephen J Gould, "Time’s Arrow, Time’s Cycle", 1987)

"Facts do not 'speak for themselves'. They speak for or against competing theories. Facts divorced from theory or visions are mere isolated curiosities." (Thomas Sowell, "A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles", 1987)

"[…] no good model ever accounted for all the facts, since some data was bound to be misleading if not plain wrong. A theory that did fit all the data would have been ‘carpentered’ to do this and would thus be open to suspicion." (Francis H C Crick, "What Mad Pursuit: A Personal View of Scientific Discovery", 1988)

"Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis: you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory." (Stephen Hawking,  "A Brief History of Time", 1988)

"Theories are not so much wrong as incomplete." (Isaac Asimov, "The Relativity of Wrong", 1988)

"A discovery in science, or a new theory, even where it appears most unitary and most all-embracing, deals with some immediate element of novelty or paradox within the framework of far vaster, unanalyzed, unarticulated reserves of knowledge, experience, faith, and presupposition. Our progress is narrow: it takes a vast world unchallenged and for granted." (James R Oppenheimer, "Atom and Void", 1989)

"Model is used as a theory. It becomes theory when the purpose of building a model is to understand the mechanisms involved in the developmental process. Hence as theory, model does not carve up or change the world, but it explains how change takes place and in what way or manner. This leads to build change in the structures." (Laxmi K Patnaik, "Model Building in Political Science", The Indian Journal of Political Science Vol. 50 (2), 1989)

"A law explains a set of observations; a theory explains a set of laws. […] Unlike laws, theories often postulate unobservable objects as part of their explanatory mechanism." (John L Casti, "Searching for Certainty", 1990)

"It is in the nature of theoretical science that there can be no such thing as certainty. A theory is only ‘true’ for as long as the majority of the scientific community maintain the view that the theory is the one best able to explain the observations." (Jim Baggott, "The Meaning of Quantum Theory", 1992)

"Scientists use mathematics to build mental universes. They write down mathematical descriptions - models - that capture essential fragments of how they think the world behaves. Then they analyse their consequences. This is called 'theory'. They test their theories against observations: this is called 'experiment'. Depending on the result, they may modify the mathematical model and repeat the cycle until theory and experiment agree. Not that it's really that simple; but that's the general gist of it, the essence of the scientific method." (Ian Stewart & Martin Golubitsky, "Fearful Symmetry: Is God a Geometer?", 1992)

"Science is not about control. It is about cultivating a perpetual condition of wonder in the face of something that forever grows one step richer and subtler than our latest theory about it. It is about  reverence, not mastery." (Richard Power, "Gold Bug Variations", 1993) 

"Clearly, science is not simply a matter of observing facts. Every scientific theory also expresses a worldview. Philosophical preconceptions determine where facts are sought, how experiments are designed, and which conclusions are drawn from them." (Nancy R Pearcey & Charles B. Thaxton, "The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy", 1994)

"The amount of understanding produced by a theory is determined by how well it meets the criteria of adequacy - testability, fruitfulness, scope, simplicity, conservatism - because these criteria indicate the extent to which a theory systematizes and unifies our knowledge." (Theodore Schick Jr.,  "How to Think about Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age", 1995)

"Scientists, being as a rule more or less human beings, passionately stick up for their ideas, their pet theories. It's up to someone else to show you are wrong." (Niles Eldredge, "Reinventing Darwin", 1995)

"There are two kinds of mistakes. There are fatal mistakes that destroy a theory; but there are also contingent ones, which are useful in testing the stability of a theory." (Gian-Carlo Rota, [lecture] 1996)

"Paradigms are the most general-rather like a philosophical or ideological framework. Theories are more specific, based on the paradigm and designed to describe what happens in one of the many realms of events encompassed by the paradigm. Models are even more specific providing the mechanisms by which events occur in a particular part of the theory's realm. Of all three, models are most affected by empirical data - models come and go, theories only give way when evidence is overwhelmingly against them and paradigms stay put until a radically better idea comes along." (Lee R Beach, "The Psychology of Decision Making: People in Organizations", 1997)

"Ideas about organization are always based on implicit images or metaphors that persuade us to see, understand, and manage situations in a particular way. Metaphors create insight. But they also distort. They have strengths. But they also have limitations. In creating ways of seeing, they create ways of not seeing. There can be no single theory or metaphor that gives an all-purpose point of view, and there can be no simple 'correct theory' for structuring everything we do." (Gareth Morgan, "Imaginization", 1997)

"An individual understands a concept, skill, theory, or domain of knowledge to the extent that he or she can apply it appropriately in a new situation." (Howard Gardner, "The Disciplined Mind", 1999)

"[…] philosophical theories are structured by conceptual metaphors that constrain which inferences can be drawn within that philosophical theory. The (typically unconscious) conceptual metaphors that are constitutive of a philosophical theory have the causal effect of constraining how you can reason within that philosophical framework." (George Lakoff, "Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought", 1999)

"All scientific theories, even those in the physical sciences, are developed in a particular cultural context. Although the context may help to explain the persistence of a theory in the face of apparently falsifying evidence, the fact that a theory arises from a particular context is not sufficient to condemn it. Theories and paradigms must be accepted, modified or rejected on the basis of evidence." (Richard P Bentall,  "Madness Explained: Psychosis and Human Nature", 2003)

"A scientific theory is a concise and coherent set of concepts, claims, and laws (frequently expressed mathematically) that can be used to precisely and accurately explain and predict natural phenomena." (Mordechai Ben-Ari, "Just a Theory: Exploring the Nature of Science", 2005)

"In science, for a theory to be believed, it must make a prediction - different from those made by previous theories - for an experiment not yet done. For the experiment to be meaningful, we must be able to get an answer that disagrees with that prediction. When this is the case, we say that a theory is falsifiable - vulnerable to being shown false. The theory also has to be confirmable, it must be possible to verify a new prediction that only this theory makes. Only when a theory has been tested and the results agree with the theory do we advance the statement to the rank of a true scientific theory." (Lee Smolin, "The Trouble with Physics", 2006)

"A theory appears to be beautiful or elegant (or simple, if you prefer) when it can be expressed concisely in terms of mathematics we already have." (Murray Gell-Mann, "Beauty and Truth in Physics", 2007)

"In science we try to explain reality by using models (theories). This is necessary because reality itself is too complex. So we need to come up with a model for that aspect of reality we want to understand – usually with the help of mathematics. Of course, these models or theories can only be simplifications of that part of reality we are looking at. A model can never be a perfect description of reality, and there can never be a part of reality perfectly mirroring a model." (Manfred Drosg, "Dealing with Uncertainties: A Guide to Error Analysis", 2007)

"It is also inevitable for any model or theory to have an uncertainty (a difference between model and reality). Such uncertainties apply both to the numerical parameters of the model and to the inadequacy of the model as well. Because it is much harder to get a grip on these types of uncertainties, they are disregarded, usually." (Manfred Drosg, "Dealing with Uncertainties: A Guide to Error Analysis", 2007)

"A theory is a speculative explanation of a particular phenomenon which derives it legitimacy from conforming to the primary assumptions of the worldview of the culture in which it appears. There can be more than one theory for a particular phenomenon that conforms to a given worldview. […]  A new theory may seem to trigger a change in worldview, as in this case, but logically a change in worldview must precede a change in theory, otherwise the theory will not be viable. A change in worldview will necessitate a change in all theories in all branches of study." (M G Jackson, "Transformative Learning for a New Worldview: Learning to Think Differently", 2008)

"All scientific theories, even those in the physical sciences, are developed in a particular cultural context. Although the context may help to explain the persistence of a theory in the face of apparently falsifying evidence, the fact that a theory arises from a particular context is not sufficient to condemn it. Theories and paradigms must be accepted, modified or rejected on the basis of evidence."  (Richard P Bentall,  "Madness Explained: Psychosis and Human Nature", 2003) 

"With each theory or model, our concepts of reality and of the fundamental constituents of the universe have changed." (Stephen Hawking & Leonard Mlodinow, "The Grand Design", 2010)

"A theory is a set of deductively closed propositions that explain and predict empirical phenomena, and a model is a theory that is idealized." (Jay Odenbaugh, "True Lies: Realism, Robustness, and Models", Philosophy of Science, Vol. 78, No. 5, 2011)

"Science would be better understood if we called theories ‘misconceptions’ from the outset, instead of only after we have discovered their successors." (David Deutsch, "Beginning of Infinity", 2011)

"Complexity has the propensity to overload systems, making the relevance of a particular piece of information not statistically significant. And when an array of mind-numbing factors is added into the equation, theory and models rarely conform to reality." (Lawrence K Samuels, "Defense of Chaos: The Chaology of Politics, Economics and Human Action", 2013)

"[…] if one has a theory, one needs to be willing to try to prove it wrong as much as one tries to provide that it is right […]" (Lawrence M Krauss et al, A Universe from Nothing, 2013)

"Mathematical modeling is the modern version of both applied mathematics and theoretical physics. In earlier times, one proposed not a model but a theory. By talking today of a model rather than a theory, one acknowledges that the way one studies the phenomenon is not unique; it could also be studied other ways. One's model need not claim to be unique or final. It merits consideration if it provides an insight that isn't better provided by some other model." (Reuben Hersh,"Mathematics as an Empirical Phenomenon, Subject to Modeling", 2017)

"Scientists generally agree that no theory is 100 percent correct. Thus, the real test of knowledge is not truth, but utility." (Yuval N Harari, "Sapiens: A brief history of humankind", 2017) 

"A theory is nothing but a tool to know the reality. If a theory contradicts reality, it must be discarded at the earliest." (Awdhesh Singh, "Myths are Real, Reality is a Myth", 2018)

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

About Me

My photo
Koeln, NRW, Germany
IT Professional with more than 24 years experience in IT in the area of full life-cycle of Web/Desktop/Database Applications Development, Software Engineering, Consultancy, Data Management, Data Quality, Data Migrations, Reporting, ERP implementations & support, Team/Project/IT Management, etc.