Tradeoffs and Idealization in Biological and Chemical Modeling

生物和化学建模中的权衡和理想化

• 批准号: 0620887
• 负责人: Michael Weisberg
• 金额: $ 11.53万
• 依托单位: University of Pennsylvania
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Continuing Grant
• 财政年份: 2006
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2006-08-01 至 2008-07-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0620887&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Tradeoffs; Idealization; Biological; Chemical; Modeling

Tradeoffs and Idealization in Biological and Chemical ModelingScientific models almost always contain idealizations. This raises a number of fundamentalphilosophical questions: Is idealization inevitable regardless of the amountof data and computational power at our disposal? Does idealization have any nonpragmaticvalue or justification? Will idealization persist as science progresses?Much of the recent philosophical literature correctly suggest that idealization hasepistemic value and is likely to persist as science progress. This has been defendedin different ways, including by demonstrating how idealized models can identify corecausal phenomena. However, one important defense of idealization has not yet playeda central role in philosophical discussions: the existence of tradeoffs. Modelers havemultiple theoretical desiderata including precision, generality, and accuracy. Somedesiderata cannot be simultaneously maximized because they constrain and trade offagainst one another. This necessitates the construction of multiple idealized modelsfor a given phenomenon. Intellectual Merit: Tradeoffs and Idealization in Biological and Chemical Modeling will defend the existenceof tradeoffs among the desiderata of models and modeling and argue that thesetradeoffs are part of the explanation and justification of idealization's ubiquity. Theanalysis will focus on classic models of predation, competition, and molecular structure,as these exemplify theoretical practice in evolutionary ecology and quantum chemistry.This project can be divided into three components. The first part consists of identifyingand characterizing the most important desiderata for theoretical modeling. Examininguniversal desiderata of models as well as specific properties of ecological andchemical models, this stage of research will generate a set of definitions that are bothanalytically rigorous and consistent with scientific practice. In the second part, tradeoffsand other constraints among these desiderata will be identified. This will consist ofshowing, by both mathematical and empirical means, that increasing the magnitude ofsome desiderata will necessarily affect the magnitude of others. This analysis will yielda list of the most important tradeoffs. Finally, these analyses will be used to argue thatthe existence of tradeoffs is part of the explanation and justification for idealization.This project is primarily a contribution to the scientific and philosophical literatureabout modeling and idealization. Broader Impacts: It will also have a very direct impact on the debatebetween biologist Richard Levins and his critics over the existence of tradeoffs. WhileLevins has long maintained that simultaneously maximizing all theoretical desideratawas impossible, his lack of formal arguments for this thesis have left his insights vulnerableto critical attack. This project will yield arguments to defend Levins' position.Another wider impact concerns scientific pedagogy. Ideas from this project willbe reformulated for use in secondary and higher education with the primary goal ofmaking citizens more informed consumers of science, especially in fields such as climatescience where critics prey on public misunderstanding of modeling and idealization.A secondary goal is to improve advanced textbook discussions of the justification formodeling and theorizing.Finally, the arguments of this project may be useful in adjudicating disputes betweendifferent groups of theorists. Some theorists believe that idealization shouldultimately be eliminated from their models; others believe that idealized models willalways be important in scientific inquiry, despite their inaccuracies. Rational resolutionof these disputes might be aided by fully accounting of the rationals for idealization,including the existence of tradeoffs.

生物和化学建模中的权衡和理想化科学模型几乎总是包含理想化。这就提出了一些基本的哲学问题：不管我们有多少数据和计算能力，理想化是不可避免的吗？理想化有任何非实用价值或理由吗？随着科学的进步，理想化会持续下去吗？最近的许多哲学文献正确地表明，理想化具有认识价值，并可能随着科学的进步而持续存在。这已经被不同的方式辩护，包括通过展示理想化的模型如何识别核心因果现象。然而，理想化的一个重要辩护在哲学讨论中还没有发挥核心作用：权衡的存在。建模者有多重理论需求，包括精确性、通用性和准确性。某些必要条件不能同时最大化，因为它们相互制约，相互权衡。这就需要为一个给定的现象建立多个理想化的模型。 智力优势：《生物和化学建模中的权衡和理想化》将为模型和建模的必要性之间的权衡辩护，并认为这些权衡是理想化普遍存在的解释和理由的一部分。分析将集中在经典模型的捕食，竞争和分子结构，因为这些理论实践在进化生态学和量子化学。第一部分包括识别和表征理论建模的最重要的必要条件。考察模型的普遍需求以及生态和化学模型的具体属性，这一阶段的研究将产生一套既分析严谨又符合科学实践的定义。在第二部分中，权衡和其他制约因素之间的这些desiderata将被确定。这将包括通过数学和经验的方法来证明，增加一些必要条件的数量必然会影响其他条件的数量。这个分析将产生一个最重要的权衡清单。最后，这些分析将被用来论证权衡的存在是对理想化的部分解释和辩护。这个项目主要是对关于建模和理想化的科学和哲学文献的贡献。更广泛的影响：这也将对生物学家理查德·莱文斯和他的批评者之间关于权衡存在的争论产生非常直接的影响。虽然莱文斯长期以来一直坚持认为，同时最大限度地提高所有的理论欲望是不可能的，他缺乏正式的论点，这一论点使他的见解容易受到批评的攻击。该项目将提供捍卫莱文斯立场的论据。另一个更广泛的影响涉及科学教育学。这个项目的想法将被重新制定，用于中等和高等教育，主要目标是使公民更了解科学的消费者，特别是在气候科学等领域，批评家们利用公众对建模和理想化的误解。第二个目标是改善高级教科书对建模和理论化的合理性的讨论。最后，这个项目的论点可能有助于裁决不同理论家群体之间的争议。一些理论家认为理想化最终应该从他们的模型中消除;其他人认为理想化的模型在科学探究中总是很重要的，尽管它们不准确。这些争议的合理解决可能有助于充分考虑理想化的合理性，包括权衡的存在。