-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
> Fine, but more models won't help that problem.The data is the
> data.In contrast, Phil's example would be addressed by AIC.
How so?
I'll reformulate Phil's statement as: "Because understanding a referent
requires mu
Glen E. P. Ropella wrote:
> To be clear, the process works this way:
>
> 1) casual observation and psychological induction leads to a (usually
> mental) model
> 2) an experiment is designed based on that model
> 3) data are taken from the experiment
> 4) a more rigorous model is derived from the da
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
> Glen E. P. Ropella wrote:
>> To be clear, the process works this way:
>>
>> 1) casual observation and psychological induction leads to a (usually
>> mental) model
>> 2) an experiment is designed based on that model
>> 3) data
Glen E. P. Ropella wrote:
> Well, I suppose that begs the question of what we mean by "system". In
> the case of the financial machinery, it is clear how that part of the
> thing works. But, it is not at all clear how the whole system works.
> If it were, then predictive algorithms would be reaso
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
> It's price and risk that matters to quantitative traders. Price and
> risk are measurable on any historical timescale that might be of
> interest. Bias in data collection takes the form of "How do I reduce
> all this in
Glen E. P. Ropella wrote:
> But you're focusing on extrapolation, right? It strikes me that you're
> not talking about heuristic (a.k.a. explanatory) models but about
> aggregative extrapolation.
More like looking for exploitable, repeatable cause/effect
inefficiencies in an ocean of activity.
