Simplification errors in predictive models

Barbara L. van Veen, J. Roland Ortt
{"title":"Simplification errors in predictive models","authors":"Barbara L. van Veen,&nbsp;J. Roland Ortt","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Organizational and political responses to strategic surprises such as the credit crunch in 2008 and the pandemic in 2020 are increasingly reliant on scientific insights. As a result, the accuracy of scientific models has become more critical, and models have become more complex to capture the real-world phenomena as best as they can. So much, so that appeals for simplification are beginning to surface. But unfortunately, simplification has its issues. Too simple models are so generic that they no longer accurately describe or predict real-world cause-effect relationships. On the other hand, too complex models are hard to generalize. Somewhere on the continuum between too simple and too complex lies the optimal model. In this article, the authors contribute to the ongoing discussion on model complexity by presenting a logical and systematic framework of simplification issues that may occur during the conceptualization and operationalization of variables, relationships, and model contexts. The framework was developed with the help of two cases, one from foresight, a relatively young discipline, and the other from the established discipline of innovation diffusion. Both disciplines have a widely accepted foundational predictive model that could use another look. The shared errors informed the simplification framework. The framework can help social scientists to detect possible oversimplification issues in literature reviews and inform their choices for either in- or decreases in model complexity.</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"6 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.184","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ffo2.184","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Organizational and political responses to strategic surprises such as the credit crunch in 2008 and the pandemic in 2020 are increasingly reliant on scientific insights. As a result, the accuracy of scientific models has become more critical, and models have become more complex to capture the real-world phenomena as best as they can. So much, so that appeals for simplification are beginning to surface. But unfortunately, simplification has its issues. Too simple models are so generic that they no longer accurately describe or predict real-world cause-effect relationships. On the other hand, too complex models are hard to generalize. Somewhere on the continuum between too simple and too complex lies the optimal model. In this article, the authors contribute to the ongoing discussion on model complexity by presenting a logical and systematic framework of simplification issues that may occur during the conceptualization and operationalization of variables, relationships, and model contexts. The framework was developed with the help of two cases, one from foresight, a relatively young discipline, and the other from the established discipline of innovation diffusion. Both disciplines have a widely accepted foundational predictive model that could use another look. The shared errors informed the simplification framework. The framework can help social scientists to detect possible oversimplification issues in literature reviews and inform their choices for either in- or decreases in model complexity.

Abstract Image

预测模型的简化误差
对于诸如 2008 年信贷紧缩和 2020 年大流行病等战略性意外事件,组织和政治对策越来越依赖于科学洞察力。因此,科学模型的准确性变得更加重要,模型也变得更加复杂,以尽可能地捕捉现实世界的现象。如此一来,简化的呼声开始浮出水面。但遗憾的是,简化也有其问题。过于简单的模型过于笼统,无法准确描述或预测现实世界中的因果关系。另一方面,过于复杂的模型也难以推广。在过于简单和过于复杂之间的某处就是最佳模型。在本文中,作者针对变量、关系和模型背景的概念化和操作化过程中可能出现的简化问题,提出了一个逻辑性和系统性的框架,为正在进行的关于模型复杂性的讨论做出了贡献。该框架是在两个案例的帮助下建立起来的,一个来自相对年轻的学科展望,另一个来自成熟的创新扩散学科。这两门学科都有一个广为接受的基础预测模型,但需要重新审视。共同的错误为简化框架提供了依据。该框架可以帮助社会科学家发现文献综述中可能存在的过度简化问题,并为他们选择增加或减少模型复杂性提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信