Showing posts with label structure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label structure. Show all posts

01 September 2024

🗄️Data Management: Data Governance (Part I: No Guild of Heroes)

Data Management Series
Data Management Series

Data governance appeared around 1980s as topic though it gained popularity in early 2000s [1]. Twenty years later, organizations still miss the mark, respectively fail to understand and implement it in a consistent manner. As usual, the reasons for failure are multiple and they vary from misunderstanding what governance is all about to poor implementation of methodologies and inadequate management or leadership. 

Moreover, methodologies tend to idealize the various aspects and is not what organizations need, but pragmatism. For example, data governance is not about heroes and heroism [2], which can give the impression that heroic actions are involved and is not the case! Actions for the sake of action don’t necessarily lead to change by themselves. Organizations are in general good at creating meaningless action without results, especially when people preoccupy themselves, miss or ignore the mark. Big organizations are very good at generating actions without effects. 

People do talk to each other, though they try to solve their own problems and optimize their own areas without necessarily thinking about the bigger picture. The problem is not necessarily communication or the lack of depth into business issues, people do communicate, know the issues without a business impact assessment. The challenge is usually in convincing the upper management that the effort needs to be consolidated, supported, respectively the needed resources made available. 

Probably, one of the issues with data governance is the attempt of creating another structure in the organization focused on quality, which has the chances to fail, and unfortunately does fail. Many issues appear when the structure gains weight and it becomes a separate entity instead of being the backbone of organizations. 

As soon organizations separate the data governance from the key users, management and the other important decisional people in the organization, it takes a life of its own that has the chances to diverge from the initial construct. Then, organizations need "alignment" and probably other big words to coordinate the effort. Also such constructs can work but they are suboptimal because the forces will always pull in different directions.

Making each manager and the upper management responsible for governance is probably the way to go, though they’ll need the time for it. In theory, this can be achieved when many of the issues are solved at the lower level, when automation and further aspects allow them to supervise things, rather than hiding behind every issue. 

When too much mircomanagement is involved, people tend to busy themselves with topics rather than solve the issues they are confronted with. The actual actors need to be empowered to take decisions and optimize their work when needed. Kaizen, the philosophy of continuous improvement, proved itself that it works when applied correctly. They’ll need the knowledge, skills, time and support to do it though. One of the dangers is however that this becomes a full-time responsibility, which tends to create a separate entity again.

The challenge for organizations lies probably in the friction between where they are and what they must do to move forward toward the various objectives. Moving in small rapid steps is probably the way to go, though each person must be aware when something doesn’t work as expected and react. That’s probably the most important aspect. 

So, the more functions are created that diverge from the actual organization, the higher the chances for failure. Unfortunately, failure is visible in the later phases, and thus self-awareness, self-control and other similar “qualities” are needed, like small actors that keep the system in check and react whenever is needed. Ideally, the employees are the best resources to react whenever something doesn’t work as per design. 

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post 

Resources:
[1] Wikipedia (2023) Data Management [link]
[2] Tiankai Feng (2023) How to Turn Your Data Team Into Governance Heroes [link]


19 March 2024

𖣯Strategic Management: Inflection Points and the Data Mesh (Quote of the Day)

Strategic Management
Strategic Management Series

"Data mesh is what comes after an inflection point, shifting our approach, attitude, and technology toward data. Mathematically, an inflection point is a magic moment at which a curve stops bending one way and starts curving in the other direction. It’s a point that the old picture dissolves, giving way to a new one. [...] The impacts affect business agility, the ability to get value from data, and resilience to change. In the center is the inflection point, where we have a choice to make: to continue with our existing approach and, at best, reach a plateau of impact or take the data mesh approach with the promise of reaching new heights." [1]

I tried to understand the "metaphor" behind the quote. As the author through another quote pinpoints, the metaphor is borrowed from Andrew Groove:

"An inflection point occurs where the old strategic picture dissolves and gives way to the new, allowing the business to ascend to new heights. However, if you don’t navigate your way through an inflection point, you go through a peak and after the peak the business declines. [...] Put another way, a strategic inflection point is when the balance of forces shifts from the old structure, from the old ways of doing business and the old ways of competing, to the new. Before" [2]

The second part of the quote clarifies the role of the inflection point - the shift from a structure, respectively organization or system to a new one. The inflection point is not when we take a decision, but when the decision we took, and the impact shifts the balance. If the data mesh comes after the inflection point (see A), then there must be some kind of causality that converges uniquely toward the data mesh, which is questionable, if not illogical. A data mesh eventually makes sense after organizations reached a certain scale and thus is likely improbable to be adopted by small to medium businesses. Even for large organizations the data mesh may not be a viable solution if it doesn't have a proven record of success. 

I could understand if the author would have said that the data mesh will lead to an inflection point after its adoption, as is the case of transformative/disruptive technologies. Unfortunately, the tracking record of BI and Data Analytics projects doesn't give many hopes for such a magical moment to happen. Probably, becoming a data-driven organization could have such an effect, though for many organizations the effects are still far from expectations. 

There's another point to consider. A curve with inflection points can contain up and down concavities (see B) or there can be multiple curves passing through an inflection point (see C) and the continuation can be on any of the curves.

Examples of Inflection Points [3]

The change can be fast or slow (see D), and in the latter it may take a long time for change to be perceived. Also [2] notes that the perception that something changed can happen in stages. Moreover, the inflection point can be only local and doesn't describe the future evolution of the curve, which to say that the curve can change the trajectory shortly after that. It happens in business processes and policy implementations that after a change was made in extremis to alleviate an issue a slight improvement is recognized after which the performance decays sharply. It's the case of situations in which the symptoms and not the root causes were addressed. 

More appropriate to describe the change would be a tipping point, which can be defined as a critical threshold beyond which a system (the organization) reorganizes/changes, often abruptly and/or irreversible.

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post

References:
[1] Zhamak Dehghani (2021) Data Mesh: Delivering Data-Driven Value at Scale (book review)
[2] Andrew S Grove (1988) "Only the Paranoid Survive: How to Exploit the Crisis Points that Challenge Every Company and Career"
[3] SQL Troubles (2024) R Language: Drawing Function Plots (Part II - Basic Curves & Inflection Points) (link)

04 March 2024

🧭🏭Business Intelligence: Microsoft Fabric (Part II: Domains and the Data Mesh I -The Challenge of Structure Matching)

Business Intelligence Series
Business Intelligence Series

The holy grail of building a Data Analytics infrastructure seems to be nowadays the creation of a data mesh, a decentralized data architecture that organizes data by specific business domains. This endeavor proves to be difficult to achieve given the various challenges faced  – data integration, data ownership, data product creation and ownership, enablement of data citizens, respectively enforcing security and governance in a federated manner. 

Microsoft Fabric promises to facilitate the creation of data mashes with the help of domains and subdomain by providing built-in security, administration, and governance features associated with them. A domain is a way of logically grouping together all the data in an organization that is relevant to a particular area or field. A subdomain is a way for fine tuning the logical grouping of the data.

Business domains
Business domains & their entities

At high level the challenge of building a data mesh is on how to match or aggregate structures. On one side is the high-level structure of the data mesh, while on the other side is the structure of the business data entities. The data entities can be grouped within a taxonomy with multiple levels that expands to the departments. That’s why it seems somehow natural to consider the departments as the top-most domains of the data mesh. The issue is that if the segmentation starts from a high level, iI becomes inflexible in modeling. Moreover, one has only domains and subdomains, and thus a 2-level structure to model the main aspects of the data mesh.

Some organizations allow unrestricted access to the data belonging to a given department, while others breakdown the access to a more granular level. There are also organizations that don’t restrict the access at all, though this may change later. Besides permissions and a way of grouping together the entities, what value brings to set the domains as departments? 

Therefore, I’m not convinced about using an organizations’ departmental structure as domains, especially when such a structure may change and this would imply a full range of further changes. Moreover, such a structure doesn’t reflect the span of processes or how permissions are assigned for the various roles, which are better reflected on how information systems are structured. Most probably the solution needs to accommodate both perspective and be somehow in the middle. 

Take for example the internal structure of the modules from Dynamics 365 (D365). The Finance area is broken down in Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivables, Fixed Assets, General Ledger, etc. In some organizations the departments reflect this delimitation to some degree, while in others are just associated with finance-related roles. Moreover, the permissions are more granular and, reflecting the data entities the users work with. 

Conversely, SCM extends into Finance as Purchase orders, Sales orders and other business documents are the starting or intermediary points of processes that span modules. Similarly, there are processes that start in CRM or other systems. The span of processes seem to be more appropriate for structuring the data mesh, though the system overlapping with the roles involved in the processes and the free definition of process boundaries can overcomplicate the whole design.

It makes sense to define the domains at a level that resembles the structure of the modules available in D365, while the macro data-entities represent the subdomain. The subdomain would represent then master as well as transactional data entities from the perspective of the domains, with there will be entities that need to be shared between multiple domains. Such a structure has less chances to change over time, allowing more flexibility and smaller areas of focus and thus easier to design, develop, test, deploy and maintain.

Previous Post <<||>> Next Post

27 February 2024

🔖Book Review: Rolf Hichert & Jürgen Faisst's International Business Communication Standards (IBCS Version 1.2)

Over the last months I found several references to Rolf Hichert & Jürgen Faisst's booklet on business communication standards [1]. It draw my attention especially because it attempts to provide a standard for reports and data visualizations, which frankly it seems like a tremendous endeavor if done right. The two authors founded the IBCS institute 20 years ago, which is a host, training institute, and certification body of the Creative Commons project called IBCS.

The 150 pages booklet considers various standardization techniques with the help of more than 180 instructive figures, the overall structure being based on a set of principles and rules rooted in an acronym that spells "SUCCESS" - Say, Unify, Condense, Check, Express, Simplify, Structure. On one side the principles seem to form a solid fundament, however the fundament seems to suffer from the same rigidity resulted from fitting something in a nicely-spelled acronym. 

Say or conveying a message reflects the principle that each report should convey a message, otherwise the report is just a data collection. According to this "definition" most of the operational reports are just collections of data. Conversely, lot of communication in organizations revolve around issues, metrics and decision making, scenarios in which the messages conveyed can be powerful though dependent on the business context. Settling on only one message can make the message fall short.

Unifying or applying semantic notation reflects the principle that things that have same meaning should look the same. There are many patterns out there that can be standardized, however it's questionable how much complex visualizations can be standardized, respectively how much liberty of expressing certain aspects the standardization allows. 

Condense or increasing the information density reflects the requirements that all information necessary to understanding the content should, if possible, be included on one page. This allows to easier navigate the content and prioritize what the audience is able to see. The principle however seems to have more to do with the ink-information ratio principle (see [2]). 

Check or ensuring the visual integrity reflects the principle that the information should be presented in the most truthful and the most easily understood way. This is something that many data visualizations out there lack.

Express or choosing the proper visualizations is based on the principle that the visuals considered should be as intuitive as possible. In theory, the more intuitive a visual the easier is to be understood and reused, however this depends on the "visual vocabulary" and "visual grammar" of each individual. Intuition is something that needs to grow through the interplay of these two areas. Having the expectation of displaying everything in terms of basic elements is unrealistic and suboptimal. 

Simplify or avoiding clutter refers to eliminating the unnecessary from a visualization, when there's nothing to take out without changing the meaning of a visualization. At least, the principle is correctly considered even if is in general difficult to apply because quite often one needs to build something more complex and reduce the complexity through iterative steps until the simple is obtained. 

Structure or organizing the content is based on the principle that content should follow (a logical consistent) structure. The interplay between function and structure is an important topic in itself.

Browsing through the many data visualizations given as example, I'd say that many of the recommendations make sense, though from there to a standardization is still a long way. The reader should evaluate against his/her own judgements the practices described and consider what seems to work. 

The book is available on the IBS website as PDF, though the Kindle version is 40% cheaper. Overall, it is worth a read. 

Previous Post <<||>>  Next Post

Resources:
[1] Rolf Hichert & Jürgen Faisst (2022) "International Business Communication Standards (IBCS Version 1.2): Conceptual, perceptual, and semantic design of comprehensible business reports, presentations, and dashboards" (link)
[2] Edward R Tufte (1983) "The Visual Display of Quantitative Information"
[3] IBCS Institude (2024) About (link)

21 May 2020

💼Project Management: Project Planning (Part III: Planning Correctly Misunderstood III)

Mismanagement

One of the most misunderstood topics in Project Management seems to be the one of planning, and this probably because everyone has a good idea of what it means to plan an activity – we do it daily and most of the times (hopefully) we hit a bull’s-eye (or we have the impression we did that). You must do this and that, you have that dependency, you must coordinate with a few people, you must first reach that milestone before going further, you do one step at a time, and so on. It’s pretty easy, isn’t it?

From a bird’s eyes view project planning is like planning every other activity though there are several important differences. The most important one is of scale – the number of activities and resources involved, the level of coordination and communication, as well the quality with which occur, the level of uncertainty and control, respectively manageability. All these create a complexity that is hardly manageable by just one person. 

Another difference is the detail needed for the planning and targets’ reachability. Some believe that the plan needs to be done down to the lowest level of detail, which even if possible can prove to be an impediment to planning. Projects’ environment share some important characteristics with a battle field in terms of complexity of interactions, their dynamics and logistical requirements. Within an army’s structure there are levels of organization that require different mindsets and levels of planning. A general thinks primarily at strategic level in which troops and actions are seen as aggregations at the needed level of abstraction that makes their organization and planning manageable. The strategy is done however in collaboration with other generals and upper structures, while having defined the strategic goals the general must devise together with the immediate subalterns the tactics. In theory the project manager must regard the project from the same perspective. Results thus three levels of planning – strategic, done with the upper management, tactical done with the team members, respectively logistical, done within the team. That’s a way of breaking the complexity and dividing the responsibilities within the project. 

Projects’ final destination seem to have the character of a wish list more or less anchored in reality. From a technical point the target can be achievable though in big projects the most important challenges are of organizational nature – of being able to allocate and coordinate effectively the resources as needed by the project. The wish-like character is reflected also by the cost, scope, time triangle in respect to the expected quality – to some point in time one is forced to choose between two of them. On the other side, there’s the tendency to see the targets and milestones as fixed, with little room for deviation. One can easily forget that a strategic plan’s purpose is to set the objectives, identify the challenges and the possible lines of action, while a tactical plan’s objective is to devise the means to reach the objectives. Bringing everything together can easily obscure the view and, in extremis, the plan loses its actuality as soon was created (and approved). 

The most confusing aspect is probably the adherence of a plan to a given methodology, one dicing a project and thus a plan to fit a methodology by following blindly the rules and principles imposed by it instead of fitting the methodology to a project. Besides the fact that the methodologies are best practices but not necessarily good practices, what fits for an organization, they tend to be either too general, by specifying the what and not the how, or too restrictive (interpreted). 

30 July 2019

💻IT: Network (Definitions)

"Mathematically defined structure of a computing system where the operations are performed at specific locations (nodes) and the flow of information is represented by directed arcs." (Guido Deboeck & Teuvo Kohonen (Eds), "Visual Explorations in Finance with Self-Organizing Maps 2nd Ed.", 2000)

"A system of interconnected computing resources (computers, servers, printers, and so on)." (Sharon Allen & Evan Terry, "Beginning Relational Data Modeling 2nd Ed.", 2005)

"A system of connected computers. A local area network (LAN) is contained within a single company, in a single office. A wide area network (WAN) is generally distributed across a geographical area — even globally. The Internet is a very loosely connected network, meaning that it is usable by anyone and everyone." (Gavin Powell, "Beginning Database Design", 2006)

"A system of interconnected devices that provides a means for data to be transmitted from point to point." (Janice M Roehl-Anderson, "IT Best Practices for Financial Managers", 2010)

"1.Visually, a graph of nodes and connections where more than one entry point for each node is allowed. 2.In architecture, a topological arrangement of hardware and connections to allow communication between nodes and access to shared data and software." (DAMA International, "The DAMA Dictionary of Data Management", 2011)

"The connection of computer systems (nodes) by communications channels and appropriate software. |" (Marcia Kaufman et al, "Big Data For Dummies", 2013)

"The means by which electronic communications occurs between two or more nodes" (Daniel Linstedt & W H Inmon, "Data Architecture: A Primer for the Data Scientist", 2014)

"Two or more computers connected to share data and resources." (Faithe Wempen, "Computing Fundamentals: Introduction to Computers", 2015)

"People working towards a common purpose or with common interests where there is no requirement for members of the network to have a work relationship with others, and there is no requirement for mutuality as there is with a team." (Catherine Burke et al, "Systems Leadership, 2nd Ed,", 2018)

24 April 2019

💼Project Management: Project Execution (Part V: The Butterflies of Project Management)

Mismanagement

Expressed metaphorically as "the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas”, in Chaos Theory the “butterfly effect” is a hypothesis rooted in Edward N Lorenz’s work on weather forecasting and used to depict the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in nonlinear processes, systems in which the change in input is not proportional to the change in output.  

Even if overstated, the flapping of wings advances the idea that a small change (the flap of wings) in the initial conditions of a system cascades to a large-scale chain of events leading to large-scale phenomena (the tornado) . The chain of events is known as the domino effect and represents the cumulative effect produced when one event sets off a chain of similar events. If the butterfly metaphor doesn’t catch up maybe it’s easier to visualize the impact as a big surfing wave – it starts small and increases in size to the degree that it can bring a boat to the shore or make an armada drown under its force. 

Projects start as narrow activities however the longer they take and the broader they become tend to accumulate force and behave like a wave, having the force to push or drawn an organization in the flood that comes with it. A project is not only a system but a complex ecosystem - aggregations of living organisms and nonliving components with complex interactions forming a unified whole with emergent behavior deriving from the structure rather than its components - groups of people tend to  self-organize, to swarm in one direction or another, much like birds do, while knowledge seems to converge from unrelated sources (aka consilience). 

 Quite often ignored, the context in which a project starts is very important, especially because these initial factors or conditions can have a considerable impact reflected in people’s perception regarding the state or outcomes of the project, perception reflected eventually also in the decisions made during the later phases of the project. The positive or negative auspices can be easily reinforced by similar events. Given the complex correlations and implications, aspects not always correct perceived and understood can have a domino effect. 

The preparations for the project start – the Business Case, setting up the project structure, communicating project’s expectation and addressing stakeholders’ expectations, the kick-off meeting, the approval of the needed resources, the knowledge available in the team, all these have a certain influence on the project. A bad start can haunt a project long time after its start, even if the project is on the right track and makes a positive impact. In reverse, a good start can shade away some mishaps on the way, however there’s also the danger that the mishaps are ignored and have greater negative impact on the project. It may look as common sense however the first image often counts and is kept in people’s memory for a long time. 

As people are higher perceptive to negative as to positive events, there are higher the chances that a multitude of negative aspects will have bigger impact on the project. It’s again something that one can address as the project progresses. It’s not necessarily about control but about being receptive to the messages around and of allowing people to give (constructive) feedback early in the project. It’s about using the positive force of a wave and turning negative flow into a positive one. 

Being aware of the importance of the initial context is just a first step toward harnessing waves or winds’ power, it takes action and leadership to pull the project in the right direction.

24 December 2018

🔭Data Science: Randomness (Just the Quotes)

"If the number of experiments be very large, we may have precise information as to the value of the mean, but if our sample be small, we have two sources of uncertainty: (I) owing to the 'error of random sampling' the mean of our series of experiments deviates more or less widely from the mean of the population, and (2) the sample is not sufficiently large to determine what is the law of distribution of individuals." William S Gosset, "The Probable Error of a Mean", Biometrika, 1908)

"The postulate of randomness thus resolves itself into the question, ‘of what population is this a random sample?’ which must frequently be asked by every practical statistician." (Ronald  A Fisher, "On the Mathematical Foundation of Theoretical Statistics", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Vol. A222, 1922)

"The most important application of the theory of probability is to what we may call 'chance-like' or 'random' events, or occurrences. These seem to be characterized by a peculiar kind of incalculability which makes one disposed to believe - after many unsuccessful attempts - that all known rational methods of prediction must fail in their case. We have, as it were, the feeling that not a scientist but only a prophet could predict them. And yet, it is just this incalculability that makes us conclude that the calculus of probability can be applied to these events." (Karl R Popper, "The Logic of Scientific Discovery", 1934)

"The definition of random in terms of a physical operation is notoriously without effect on the mathematical operations of statistical theory because so far as these mathematical operations are concerned random is purely and simply an undefined term." (Walter A Shewhart & William E Deming, "Statistical Method from the Viewpoint of Quality Control", 1939)

"The first attempts to consider the behavior of so-called 'random neural nets' in a systematic way have led to a series of problems concerned with relations between the 'structure' and the 'function' of such nets. The 'structure' of a random net is not a clearly defined topological manifold such as could be used to describe a circuit with explicitly given connections. In a random neural net, one does not speak of 'this' neuron synapsing on 'that' one, but rather in terms of tendencies and probabilities associated with points or regions in the net." (Anatol Rapoport, "Cycle distributions in random nets", The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics 10(3), 1948)

"Time itself will come to an end. For entropy points the direction of time. Entropy is the measure of randomness. When all system and order in the universe have vanished, when randomness is at its maximum, and entropy cannot be increased, when there is no longer any sequence of cause and effect, in short when the universe has run down, there will be no direction to time - there will be no time." (Lincoln Barnett, "The Universe and Dr. Einstein", 1948)

"A random sequence is a vague notion embodying the idea of a sequence in which each term is unpredictable to the uninitiated and whose digits pass a certain number of tests traditional with statisticians and depending somewhat on the uses to which the sequence is to be put." (Derrick H Lehmer, 1951)

"We must emphasize that such terms as 'select at random', 'choose at random', and the like, always mean that some mechanical device, such as coins, cards, dice, or tables of random numbers, is used." (Frederick Mosteller et al, "Principles of Sampling", Journal of the American Statistical Association Vol. 49 (265), 1954)

"The concept of randomness arises partly from games of chance. The word ‘chance’ derives from the Latin cadentia signifying the fall of a die. The word ‘random’ itself comes from the French randir meaning to run fast or gallop." (G Spencer Brown, "Probability and Scientific Inference", 1957)

"[…] random numbers should not be generated with a method chosen at random. Some theory should be used." (Donald E Knuth, "The Art of Computer Programming" Vol. II, 1968)

"The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance." (Robert R Coveyou, [Oak Ridge National Laboratory] 1969)

"[...] too many users of the analysis of variance seem to regard the reaching of a mediocre level of significance as more important than any descriptive specification of the underlying averages Our thesis is that people have strong intuitions about random sampling; that these intuitions are wrong in fundamental respects; that these intuitions are shared by naive subjects and by trained scientists; and that they are applied with unfortunate consequences in the course of scientific inquiry. We submit that people view a sample randomly drawn from a population as highly representative, that is, similar to the population in all essential characteristics. Consequently, they expect any two samples drawn from a particular population to be more similar to one another and to the population than sampling theory predicts, at least for small samples." (Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, "Belief in the law of small numbers", Psychological Bulletin 76(2), 1971)

"It appears to be a quite general principle that, whenever there is a randomized way of doing something, then there is a nonrandomized way that delivers better performance but requires more thought." (Edwin T Jaynes, "Probability Theory: The Logic of Science", 1979)

"From a purely operational point of viewpoint […] the concept of randomness is so elusive as to cease to be viable." (Mark Kac, 1983)

"Randomness is a difficult notion for people to accept. When events come in clusters and streaks, people look for explanations and patterns. They refuse to believe that such patterns - which frequently occur in random data - could equally well be derived from tossing a coin. So it is in the stock market as well." (Burton G Malkiel, "A Random Walk Down Wall Street", 1989)

"The term chaos is used in a specific sense where it is an inherently random pattern of behaviour generated by fixed inputs into deterministic (that is fixed) rules (relationships). The rules take the form of non-linear feedback loops. Although the specific path followed by the behaviour so generated is random and hence unpredictable in the long-term, it always has an underlying pattern to it, a 'hidden' pattern, a global pattern or rhythm. That pattern is self-similarity, that is a constant degree of variation, consistent variability, regular irregularity, or more precisely, a constant fractal dimension. Chaos is therefore order (a pattern) within disorder (random behaviour)." (Ralph D Stacey, "The Chaos Frontier: Creative Strategic Control for Business", 1991)

"When nearest neighbor effects exist, the randomized complete block analysis [can be] so poor as to deserver to be called catastrophic. It [can not] even be considered a serious form of analysis. It is extremely important to make this clear to the vast number of researchers who have near religious faith in the randomized complete block design." (Walt Stroup & D Mulitze, "Nearest Neighbor Adjusted Best Linear Unbiased Prediction", The American Statistician 45, 1991) 

"Chaos demonstrates that deterministic causes can have random effects […] There's a similar surprise regarding symmetry: symmetric causes can have asymmetric effects. […] This paradox, that symmetry can get lost between cause and effect, is called symmetry-breaking. […] From the smallest scales to the largest, many of nature's patterns are a result of broken symmetry; […]" (Ian Stewart & Martin Golubitsky, "Fearful Symmetry: Is God a Geometer?", 1992)

"Probability theory is an ideal tool for formalizing uncertainty in situations where class frequencies are known or where evidence is based on outcomes of a sufficiently long series of independent random experiments. Possibility theory, on the other hand, is ideal for formalizing incomplete information expressed in terms of fuzzy propositions." (George Klir, "Fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic", 1995)

"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)

"Events may appear to us to be random, but this could be attributed to human ignorance about the details of the processes involved." (Brain S Everitt, "Chance Rules", 1999)

"I sometimes think that the only real difference between Bayesian and non-Bayesian hierarchical modelling is whether random effects are labeled with Greek or Roman letters." (Peter Diggle, "Comment on Bayesian analysis of agricultural field experiments", Journal of Royal Statistical Society B vol. 61, 1999)

"The self-similarity of fractal structures implies that there is some redundancy because of the repetition of details at all scales. Even though some of these structures may appear to teeter on the edge of randomness, they actually represent complex systems at the interface of order and disorder."  (Edward Beltrami, "What is Random?: Chaos and Order in Mathematics and Life", 1999)

"Randomness is NOT the absence of a pattern." (Bill Venables," S-Plus User’s Conference", 1999)

"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)

"[…] 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 Białynicki-Birula & Iwona Białynicka-Birula, "Modeling Reality: How Computers Mirror Life", 2004)

"Chance is just as real as causation; both are modes of becoming. The way to model a random process is to enrich the mathematical theory of probability with a model of a random mechanism. In the sciences, probabilities are never made up or 'elicited' by observing the choices people make, or the bets they are willing to place. The reason is that, in science and technology, interpreted probability exactifies objective chance, not gut feeling or intuition. No randomness, no probability." (Mario Bunge, "Chasing Reality: Strife over Realism", 2006)

"Complexity arises when emergent system-level phenomena are characterized by patterns in time or a given state space that have neither too much nor too little form. Neither in stasis nor changing randomly, these emergent phenomena are interesting, due to the coupling of individual and global behaviours as well as the difficulties they pose for prediction. Broad patterns of system behaviour may be predictable, but the system's specific path through a space of possible states is not." (Steve Maguire et al, "Complexity Science and Organization Studies", 2006)

"A Black Swan is a highly improbable event with three principal characteristics: It is unpredictable; it carries a massive impact; and, after the fact, we concoct an explanation that makes it appear less random, and more predictable, than it was. […] The Black Swan idea is based on the structure of randomness in empirical reality. [...] the Black Swan is what we leave out of simplification." (Nassim N Taleb, "The Black Swan", 2007)

"[myth:] Random errors can always be determined by repeating measurements under identical conditions. […] this statement is true only for time-related random errors ." (Manfred Drosg, "Dealing with Uncertainties: A Guide to Error Analysis", 2007)

"To fulfill the requirements of the theory underlying uncertainties, variables with random uncertainties must be independent of each other and identically distributed. In the limiting case of an infinite number of such variables, these are called normally distributed. However, one usually speaks of normally distributed variables even if their number is finite." (Manfred Drosg, "Dealing with Uncertainties: A Guide to Error Analysis", 2007)

"While in theory randomness is an intrinsic property, in practice, randomness is incomplete information." (Nassim N Taleb, "The Black Swan", 2007)

"Regression toward the mean. That is, in any series of random events an extraordinary event is most likely to be followed, due purely to chance, by a more ordinary one." (Leonard Mlodinow, "The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives", 2008)

"The key to understanding randomness and all of mathematics is not being able to intuit the answer to every problem immediately but merely having the tools to figure out the answer." (Leonard Mlodinow,"The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives", 2008)

"Data always vary randomly because the object of our inquiries, nature itself, is also random. We can analyze and predict events in nature with an increasing amount of precision and accuracy, thanks to improvements in our techniques and instruments, but a certain amount of random variation, which gives rise to uncertainty, is inevitable." (Alberto Cairo, "The Functional Art", 2011)

"No matter what the laws of chance might tell us, we search for patterns among random events wherever they might occur–not only in the stock market but even in interpreting sporting phenomena." (Burton G Malkiel, "A Random Walk Down Wall Street: The Time-Tested Strategy For Successful Investing", 2011)

"Randomness might be defined in terms of order - its absence, that is. […] Everything we care about lies somewhere in the middle, where pattern and randomness interlace." (James Gleick, "The Information: A History, a Theory, a Flood", 2011)

"The storytelling mind is allergic to uncertainty, randomness, and coincidence. It is addicted to meaning. If the storytelling mind cannot find meaningful patterns in the world, it will try to impose them. In short, the storytelling mind is a factory that churns out true stories when it can, but will manufacture lies when it can't." (Jonathan Gottschall, "The Storytelling Animal: How Stories Make Us Human", 2012)

"When some systems are stuck in a dangerous impasse, randomness and only randomness can unlock them and set them free." (Nassim N Taleb, "Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder", 2012)

"Although cascading failures may appear random and unpredictable, they follow reproducible laws that can be quantified and even predicted using the tools of network science. First, to avoid damaging cascades, we must understand the structure of the network on which the cascade propagates. Second, we must be able to model the dynamical processes taking place on these networks, like the flow of electricity. Finally, we need to uncover how the interplay between the network structure and dynamics affects the robustness of the whole system." (Albert-László Barabási, "Network Science", 2016)

"Too little attention is given to the need for statistical control, or to put it more pertinently, since statistical control (randomness) is so rarely found, too little attention is given to the interpretation of data that arise from conditions not in statistical control." (William E Deming)

More quotes on "Randomness" at the-web-of-knowledge.blogspot.com

17 December 2018

🔭Data Science: Mathematical Models (Just the Quotes)

"Experience teaches that one will be led to new discoveries almost exclusively by means of special mechanical models." (Ludwig Boltzmann, "Lectures on Gas Theory", 1896)

"If the system exhibits a structure which can be represented by a mathematical equivalent, called a mathematical model, and if the objective can be also so quantified, then some computational method may be evolved for choosing the best schedule of actions among alternatives. Such use of mathematical models is termed mathematical programming."  (George Dantzig, "Linear Programming and Extensions", 1959)

“In fact, the construction of mathematical models for various fragments of the real world, which is the most essential business of the applied mathematician, is nothing but an exercise in axiomatics.” (Marshall Stone, cca 1960)

"[...] sciences do not try to explain, they hardly even try to interpret, they mainly make models. By a model is meant a mathematical construct which, with the addition of certain verbal interpretations, describes observed phenomena. The justification of such a mathematical construct is solely and precisely that it is expected to work - that is, correctly to describe phenomena from a reasonably wide area. Furthermore, it must satisfy certain aesthetic criteria - that is, in relation to how much it describes, it must be rather simple.” (John von Neumann, “Method in the physical sciences”, 1961)

“Mathematical statistics provides an exceptionally clear example of the relationship between mathematics and the external world. The external world provides the experimentally measured distribution curve; mathematics provides the equation (the mathematical model) that corresponds to the empirical curve. The statistician may be guided by a thought experiment in finding the corresponding equation.” (Marshall J Walker, “The Nature of Scientific Thought”, 1963)

"Thus, the construction of a mathematical model consisting of certain basic equations of a process is not yet sufficient for effecting optimal control. The mathematical model must also provide for the effects of random factors, the ability to react to unforeseen variations and ensure good control despite errors and inaccuracies." (Yakov Khurgin, "Did You Say Mathematics?", 1974)

"A mathematical model is any complete and consistent set of mathematical equations which are designed to correspond to some other entity, its prototype. The prototype may be a physical, biological, social, psychological or conceptual entity, perhaps even another mathematical model." (Rutherford Aris, "Mathematical Modelling", 1978)

"Mathematical model making is an art. If the model is too small, a great deal of analysis and numerical solution can be done, but the results, in general, can be meaningless. If the model is too large, neither analysis nor numerical solution can be carried out, the interpretation of the results is in any case very difficult, and there is great difficulty in obtaining the numerical values of the parameters needed for numerical results." (Richard E Bellman, "Eye of the Hurricane: An Autobiography", 1984)

“Theoretical scientists, inching away from the safe and known, skirting the point of no return, confront nature with a free invention of the intellect. They strip the discovery down and wire it into place in the form of mathematical models or other abstractions that define the perceived relation exactly. The now-naked idea is scrutinized with as much coldness and outward lack of pity as the naturally warm human heart can muster. They try to put it to use, devising experiments or field observations to test its claims. By the rules of scientific procedure it is then either discarded or temporarily sustained. Either way, the central theory encompassing it grows. If the abstractions survive they generate new knowledge from which further exploratory trips of the mind can be planned. Through the repeated alternation between flights of the imagination and the accretion of hard data, a mutual agreement on the workings of the world is written, in the form of natural law.” (Edward O Wilson, “Biophilia”, 1984)

“The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?” (Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", 1988)

“Mathematical modeling is about rules - the rules of reality. What distinguishes a mathematical model from, say, a poem, a song, a portrait or any other kind of ‘model’, is that the mathematical model is an image or picture of reality painted with logical symbols instead of with words, sounds or watercolors.” (John L Casti, "Reality Rules, The Fundamentals", 1992)

“Pedantry and sectarianism aside, the aim of theoretical physics is to construct mathematical models such as to enable us, from the use of knowledge gathered in a few observations, to predict by logical processes the outcomes in many other circumstances. Any logically sound theory satisfying this condition is a good theory, whether or not it be derived from ‘ultimate’ or ‘fundamental’ truth.” (Clifford Truesdell & Walter Noll, “The Non-Linear Field Theories of Mechanics” 2nd Ed., 1992)

"Nature behaves in ways that look mathematical, but nature is not the same as mathematics. Every mathematical model makes simplifying assumptions; its conclusions are only as valid as those assumptions. The assumption of perfect symmetry is excellent as a technique for deducing the conditions under which symmetry-breaking is going to occur, the general form of the result, and the range of possible behaviour. To deduce exactly which effect is selected from this range in a practical situation, we have to know which imperfections are present." (Ian Stewart & Martin Golubitsky, "Fearful Symmetry", 1992)

“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)

"Formulation of a mathematical model is the first step in the process of analyzing the behaviour of any real system. However, to produce a useful model, one must first adopt a set of simplifying assumptions which have to be relevant in relation to the physical features of the system to be modelled and to the specific information one is interested in. Thus, the aim of modelling is to produce an idealized description of reality, which is both expressible in a tractable mathematical form and sufficiently close to reality as far as the physical mechanisms of interest are concerned." (Francois Axisa, "Discrete Systems" Vol. I, 2001)

"[…] interval mathematics and fuzzy logic together can provide a promising alternative to mathematical modeling for many physical systems that are too vague or too complicated to be described by simple and crisp mathematical formulas or equations. When interval mathematics and fuzzy logic are employed, the interval of confidence and the fuzzy membership functions are used as approximation measures, leading to the so-called fuzzy systems modeling." (Guanrong Chen & Trung Tat Pham, "Introduction to Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Control Systems", 2001)

"Modeling, in a general sense, refers to the establishment of a description of a system (a plant, a process, etc.) in mathematical terms, which characterizes the input-output behavior of the underlying system. To describe a physical system […] we have to use a mathematical formula or equation that can represent the system both qualitatively and quantitatively. Such a formulation is a mathematical representation, called a mathematical model, of the physical system." (Guanrong Chen & Trung Tat Pham, "Introduction to Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Control Systems", 2001)

“What is a mathematical model? One basic answer is that it is the formulation in mathematical terms of the assumptions and their consequences believed to underlie a particular ‘real world’ problem. The aim of mathematical modeling is the practical application of mathematics to help unravel the underlying mechanisms involved in, for example, economic, physical, biological, or other systems and processes.” (John A Adam, “Mathematics in Nature”, 2003)

“Mathematical modeling is as much ‘art’ as ‘science’: it requires the practitioner to (i) identify a so-called ‘real world’ problem (whatever the context may be); (ii) formulate it in mathematical terms (the ‘word problem’ so beloved of undergraduates); (iii) solve the problem thus formulated (if possible; perhaps approximate solutions will suffice, especially if the complete problem is intractable); and (iv) interpret the solution in the context of the original problem.” (John A Adam, “Mathematics in Nature”, 2003)

“Mathematical modeling is the application of mathematics to describe real-world problems and investigating important questions that arise from it.” (Sandip Banerjee, “Mathematical Modeling: Models, Analysis and Applications”, 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)

"Machine learning is about making computers learn and perform tasks better based on past historical data. Learning is always based on observations from the data available. The emphasis is on making computers build mathematical models based on that learning and perform tasks automatically without the intervention of humans." (Umesh R Hodeghatta & Umesha Nayak, "Business Analytics Using R: A Practical Approach", 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)

14 December 2018

🔭Data Science: Algorithms (Just the Quotes)

"Mathematics is an aspect of culture as well as a collection of algorithms." (Carl B Boyer, "The History of the Calculus and Its Conceptual Development", 1959)

"Design problems - generating or discovering alternatives - are complex largely because they involve two spaces, an action space and a state space, that generally have completely different structures. To find a design requires mapping the former of these on the latter. For many, if not most, design problems in the real world systematic algorithms are not known that guarantee solutions with reasonable amounts of computing effort. Design uses a wide range of heuristic devices - like means-end analysis, satisficing, and the other procedures that have been outlined - that have been found by experience to enhance the efficiency of search. Much remains to be learned about the nature and effectiveness of these devices." (Herbert A Simon, "The Logic of Heuristic Decision Making", [in "The Logic of Decision and Action"], 1966)

"An algorithm must be seen to be believed, and the best way to learn what an algorithm is all about is to try it." (Donald E Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming Vol. I, 1968)

"Scientific laws give algorithms, or procedures, for determining how systems behave. The computer program is a medium in which the algorithms can be expressed and applied. Physical objects and mathematical structures can be represented as numbers and symbols in a computer, and a program can be written to manipulate them according to the algorithms. When the computer program is executed, it causes the numbers and symbols to be modified in the way specified by the scientific laws. It thereby allows the consequences of the laws to be deduced." (Stephen Wolfram, "Computer Software in Science and Mathematics", 1984)

"Algorithmic complexity theory and nonlinear dynamics together establish the fact that determinism reigns only over a quite finite domain; outside this small haven of order lies a largely uncharted, vast wasteland of chaos." (Joseph Ford, "Progress in Chaotic Dynamics: Essays in Honor of Joseph Ford's 60th Birthday", 1988)

"On this view, we recognize science to be the search for algorithmic compressions. We list sequences of observed data. We try to formulate algorithms that compactly represent the information content of those sequences. Then we test the correctness of our hypothetical abbreviations by using them to predict the next terms in the string. These predictions can then be compared with the future direction of the data sequence. Without the development of algorithmic compressions of data all science would be replaced by mindless stamp collecting - the indiscriminate accumulation of every available fact. Science is predicated upon the belief that the Universe is algorithmically compressible and the modern search for a Theory of Everything is the ultimate expression of that belief, a belief that there is an abbreviated representation of the logic behind the Universe's properties that can be written down in finite form by human beings." (John D Barrow, New Theories of Everything", 1991)

"Algorithms are a set of procedures to generate the answer to a problem." (Stuart Kauffman, "At Home in the Universe: The Search for Laws of Complexity", 1995)

"Let us regard a proof of an assertion as a purely mechanical procedure using precise rules of inference starting with a few unassailable axioms. This means that an algorithm can be devised for testing the validity of an alleged proof simply by checking the successive steps of the argument; the rules of inference constitute an algorithm for generating all the statements that can be deduced in a finite number of steps from the axioms." (Edward Beltrami, "What is Random?: Chaos and Order in Mathematics and Life", 1999)

"The vast majority of information that we have on most processes tends to be nonnumeric and nonalgorithmic. Most of the information is fuzzy and linguistic in form." (Timothy J Ross & W Jerry Parkinson, "Fuzzy Set Theory, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Systems", 2002)

"Knowledge is encoded in models. Models are synthetic sets of rules, and pictures, and algorithms providing us with useful representations of the world of our perceptions and of their patterns." (Didier Sornette, "Why Stock Markets Crash - Critical Events in Complex Systems", 2003)

"Swarm Intelligence can be defined more precisely as: Any attempt to design algorithms or distributed problem-solving methods inspired by the collective behavior of the social insect colonies or other animal societies. The main properties of such systems are flexibility, robustness, decentralization and self-organization." ("Swarm Intelligence in Data Mining", Ed. Ajith Abraham et al, 2006)

"The burgeoning field of computer science has shifted our view of the physical world from that of a collection of interacting material particles to one of a seething network of information. In this way of looking at nature, the laws of physics are a form of software, or algorithm, while the material world - the hardware - plays the role of a gigantic computer." (Paul C W Davies, "Laying Down the Laws", New Scientist, 2007)

"An algorithm refers to a successive and finite procedure by which it is possible to solve a certain problem. Algorithms are the operational base for most computer programs. They consist of a series of instructions that, thanks to programmers’ prior knowledge about the essential characteristics of a problem that must be solved, allow a step-by-step path to the solution." (Diego Rasskin-Gutman, "Chess Metaphors: Artificial Intelligence and the Human Mind", 2009)

"Programming is a science dressed up as art, because most of us don’t understand the physics of software and it’s rarely, if ever, taught. The physics of software is not algorithms, data structures, languages, and abstractions. These are just tools we make, use, and throw away. The real physics of software is the physics of people. Specifically, it’s about our limitations when it comes to complexity and our desire to work together to solve large problems in pieces. This is the science of programming: make building blocks that people can understand and use easily, and people will work together to solve the very largest problems." (Pieter Hintjens, "ZeroMQ: Messaging for Many Applications", 2012)

"These nature-inspired algorithms gradually became more and more attractive and popular among the evolutionary computation research community, and together they were named swarm intelligence, which became the little brother of the major four evolutionary computation algorithms." (Yuhui Shi, "Emerging Research on Swarm Intelligence and Algorithm Optimization", Information Science Reference, 2014)

"[...] algorithms, which are abstract or idealized process descriptions that ignore details and practicalities. An algorithm is a precise and unambiguous recipe. It’s expressed in terms of a fixed set of basic operations whose meanings are completely known and specified. It spells out a sequence of steps using those operations, with all possible situations covered, and it’s guaranteed to stop eventually." (Brian W Kernighan, "Understanding the Digital World", 2017)

"An algorithm is the computer science version of a careful, precise, unambiguous recipe or tax form, a sequence of steps that is guaranteed to compute a result correctly." (Brian W Kernighan, "Understanding the Digital World", 2017)

"Again, classical statistics only summarizes data, so it does not provide even a language for asking [a counterfactual] question. Causal inference provides a notation and, more importantly, offers a solution. As with predicting the effect of interventions [...], in many cases we can emulate human retrospective thinking with an algorithm that takes what we know about the observed world and produces an answer about the counterfactual world." (Judea Pearl & Dana Mackenzie, "The Book of Why: The new science of cause and effect", 2018)

"Algorithms describe the solution to a problem in terms of the data needed to represent the  problem instance and a set of steps necessary to produce the intended result." (Bradley N Miller et al, "Python Programming in Context", 2019)

"An algorithm, meanwhile, is a step-by-step recipe for performing a series of actions, and in most cases 'algorithm' means simply 'computer program'." (Tim Harford, "The Data Detective: Ten easy rules to make sense of statistics", 2020)

"Big data is revolutionizing the world around us, and it is easy to feel alienated by tales of computers handing down decisions made in ways we don’t understand. I think we’re right to be concerned. Modern data analytics can produce some miraculous results, but big data is often less trustworthy than small data. Small data can typically be scrutinized; big data tends to be locked away in the vaults of Silicon Valley. The simple statistical tools used to analyze small datasets are usually easy to check; pattern-recognizing algorithms can all too easily be mysterious and commercially sensitive black boxes." (Tim Harford, "The Data Detective: Ten easy rules to make sense of statistics", 2020)

"Each of us is sweating data, and those data are being mopped up and wrung out into oceans of information. Algorithms and large datasets are being used for everything from finding us love to deciding whether, if we are accused of a crime, we go to prison before the trial or are instead allowed to post bail. We all need to understand what these data are and how they can be exploited." (Tim Harford, "The Data Detective: Ten easy rules to make sense of statistics", 2020)

"Many people have strong intuitions about whether they would rather have a vital decision about them made by algorithms or humans. Some people are touchingly impressed by the capabilities of the algorithms; others have far too much faith in human judgment. The truth is that sometimes the algorithms will do better than the humans, and sometimes they won’t. If we want to avoid the problems and unlock the promise of big data, we’re going to need to assess the performance of the algorithms on a case-by-case basis. All too often, this is much harder than it should be. […] So the problem is not the algorithms, or the big datasets. The problem is a lack of scrutiny, transparency, and debate." (Tim Harford, "The Data Detective: Ten easy rules to make sense of statistics", 2020)

More quotes on "Algorithms" at the-web-of-knowledge.blogspot.com.

13 December 2018

🔭Data Science: Bayesian Networks (Just the Quotes)

"The best way to convey to the experimenter what the data tell him about theta is to show him a picture of the posterior distribution." (George E P Box & George C Tiao, "Bayesian Inference in Statistical Analysis", 1973)

"In the design of experiments, one has to use some informal prior knowledge. How does one construct blocks in a block design problem for instance? It is stupid to think that use is not made of a prior. But knowing that this prior is utterly casual, it seems ludicrous to go through a lot of integration, etc., to obtain 'exact' posterior probabilities resulting from this prior. So, I believe the situation with respect to Bayesian inference and with respect to inference, in general, has not made progress. Well, Bayesian statistics has led to a great deal of theoretical research. But I don't see any real utilizations in applications, you know. Now no one, as far as I know, has examined the question of whether the inferences that are obtained are, in fact, realized in the predictions that they are used to make." (Oscar Kempthorne, "A conversation with Oscar Kempthorne", Statistical Science, 1995)

"Bayesian methods are complicated enough, that giving researchers user-friendly software could be like handing a loaded gun to a toddler; if the data is crap, you won't get anything out of it regardless of your political bent." (Brad Carlin, "Bayes offers a new way to make sense of numbers", Science, 1999)

"Bayesian inference is a controversial approach because it inherently embraces a subjective notion of probability. In general, Bayesian methods provide no guarantees on long run performance." (Larry A Wasserman, "All of Statistics: A concise course in statistical inference", 2004)

"Bayesian inference is appealing when prior information is available since Bayes’ theorem is a natural way to combine prior information with data. Some people find Bayesian inference psychologically appealing because it allows us to make probability statements about parameters. […] In parametric models, with large samples, Bayesian and frequentist methods give approximately the same inferences. In general, they need not agree." (Larry A Wasserman, "All of Statistics: A concise course in statistical inference", 2004)

"The Bayesian approach is based on the following postulates: (B1) Probability describes degree of belief, not limiting frequency. As such, we can make probability statements about lots of things, not just data which are subject to random variation. […] (B2) We can make probability statements about parameters, even though they are fixed constants. (B3) We make inferences about a parameter θ by producing a probability distribution for θ. Inferences, such as point estimates and interval estimates, may then be extracted from this distribution." (Larry A Wasserman, "All of Statistics: A concise course in statistical inference", 2004)

"The important thing is to understand that frequentist and Bayesian methods are answering different questions. To combine prior beliefs with data in a principled way, use Bayesian inference. To construct procedures with guaranteed long run performance, such as confidence intervals, use frequentist methods. Generally, Bayesian methods run into problems when the parameter space is high dimensional." (Larry A Wasserman, "All of Statistics: A concise course in statistical inference", 2004) 

"Bayesian networks can be constructed by hand or learned from data. Learning both the topology of a Bayesian network and the parameters in the CPTs in the network is a difficult computational task. One of the things that makes learning the structure of a Bayesian network so difficult is that it is possible to define several different Bayesian networks as representations for the same full joint probability distribution." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, worked examples, and case studies", 2015) 

"Bayesian networks provide a more flexible representation for encoding the conditional independence assumptions between the features in a domain. Ideally, the topology of a network should reflect the causal relationships between the entities in a domain. Properly constructed Bayesian networks are relatively powerful models that can capture the interactions between descriptive features in determining a prediction." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, worked examples, and case studies", 2015) 

"Bayesian networks use a graph-based representation to encode the structural relationships - such as direct influence and conditional independence - between subsets of features in a domain. Consequently, a Bayesian network representation is generally more compact than a full joint distribution (because it can encode conditional independence relationships), yet it is not forced to assert a global conditional independence between all descriptive features. As such, Bayesian network models are an intermediary between full joint distributions and naive Bayes models and offer a useful compromise between model compactness and predictive accuracy." (John D Kelleher et al, "Fundamentals of Machine Learning for Predictive Data Analytics: Algorithms, worked examples, and case studies", 2015)

"Bayesian networks inhabit a world where all questions are reducible to probabilities, or (in the terminology of this chapter) degrees of association between variables; they could not ascend to the second or third rungs of the Ladder of Causation. Fortunately, they required only two slight twists to climb to the top." (Judea Pearl & Dana Mackenzie, "The Book of Why: The new science of cause and effect", 2018)

"The main differences between Bayesian networks and causal diagrams lie in how they are constructed and the uses to which they are put. A Bayesian network is literally nothing more than a compact representation of a huge probability table. The arrows mean only that the probabilities of child nodes are related to the values of parent nodes by a certain formula (the conditional probability tables) and that this relation is sufficient. That is, knowing additional ancestors of the child will not change the formula. Likewise, a missing arrow between any two nodes means that they are independent, once we know the values of their parents. [...] If, however, the same diagram has been constructed as a causal diagram, then both the thinking that goes into the construction and the interpretation of the final diagram change." (Judea Pearl & Dana Mackenzie, "The Book of Why: The new science of cause and effect", 2018)

"The transparency of Bayesian networks distinguishes them from most other approaches to machine learning, which tend to produce inscrutable 'black boxes'. In a Bayesian network you can follow every step and understand how and why each piece of evidence changed the network’s beliefs." (Judea Pearl & Dana Mackenzie, "The Book of Why: The new science of cause and effect", 2018)

"With Bayesian networks, we had taught machines to think in shades of gray, and this was an important step toward humanlike thinking. But we still couldn’t teach machines to understand causes and effects. [...] By design, in a Bayesian network, information flows in both directions, causal and diagnostic: smoke increases the likelihood of fire, and fire increases the likelihood of smoke. In fact, a Bayesian network can’t even tell what the 'causal direction' is." (Judea Pearl & Dana Mackenzie, "The Book of Why: The new science of cause and effect", 2018)

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.