Multiple models, one explanation

Abstract

We develop an account of how mutually inconsistent models of the same target system can provide coherent information about the system. Our account makes use of ideas from the debate surrounding robustness analysis and draws on the idea of a shared structure among models. To illustrate, we consider a case study from international trade-theory.

Operads for complex system design specification, analysis and synthesis

“…While the above discussion sketches how to specify a network model for tasking, which constructs a network operad [40], these precise details [84] need not concern the applied practitioner. 9 is sufficient to provide a Petri net as a template, from which a network operad is constructed. Whereas a template to design structures defines the basic ways system types can interact, a template to task behaviour defines the primitive tasks for agent types C, which are token colours in the Petri net.…”

“…The most powerful way operads separate is by aligning complementary models while maintaining compatibility with system decompositions (figure 1, (3)). Reconciling complementary models is a persistent and pervasive issue across domains [3,[6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Historically, Eilenberg & Mac Lane [13] invented natural transformations to align computational models of topological spaces.…”

“…The recovery of downed airman Gene Hambleton, call sign Bat 21 Bravo, during the Vietnam War is a historical example of ill-fated SAR risk management. Hambleton's eventual recovery cost five additional aircraft being shot down and 11 deaths; for comparison, a total of 71 rescuers and 45 aircraft were lost to save 3883 lives during Vietnam War SAR [81] 9. That is, a Petri net specifies the network model Λ : S(C) → Cat to task behaviour.…”

Defending De-idealization in Economic Modeling: A Case Study

“…In the aftermath of Rodrik’s Economic Rules (Rodrik 2015), many scholars have strongly defended the advantages and desirability of a greater pluralism in the methods, the aims and the topics of current economic research. Among them, several philosophers of economics started focusing their attention on families of models, rather than on single models, in order to discuss interesting methodological issues (Aydinonat 2018; Gräbner and Strunk 2020; Grüne-Yanoff and Marchionni 2018; Lisciandra and Korbmacher 2021; Veit 2019). Despite their different views on economic modeling, the shared idea is that knowledge accumulation in economics mainly proceeds “horizontally,” that is, by developing many different and sometimes mutually inconsistent models of the same target, each of which is only partial and highly context-sensitive.…”

Multi-Model Reasoning in Economics: The Case of COMPASS

“…See authors such as Odenbaugh and Alexandrova, (2011), Levins (1966), Kuorikoski et al (2010), Kuorikoski and Marchionni (2016), Parker (2013), Lloyd (2010, 2015), and Wimsatt (1981). For a case from economics, see Lisciandra and Korbmacher (2021). See Woodward (2006) for a more detailed taxonomy of different kinds of robustness.…”