Talk:Model
Why description?
⇤--#(number):: . Why is a model a description of the computation procedure and not the procedure as such? Or an "incarnation" or a "software"? --Alexandra Kuhn 12:12, 14 May 2008 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)
- ----#(number):: . Because the computation procedure is the doing of it (after you have taken the input to compute and before you have got the output as the result; the whole thing is a process). Or, in other words, the running of the software is a procedure, the software is a description of a procedure. But you are right, the definition is not very clear. --Jouni 22:07, 14 May 2008 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)
| Fact discussion: . |
|---|
| Opening statement:
Closing statement: Resolution not yet found. (A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.) |
| Argumentation:
⇤--#(1):: . There is no such thing as structured and unstructured models. --Alexandra Kuhn 08:12, 10 June 2008 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack) Jouni: There are formally structured models (they are methods), and then there are informally structured model (they are not OA objects). Because of this, "model" is an ambiguous word and I try to avoid it in methodology text. The same applies to "tool". I don't like their current definitions (or, I don't see a reason to develop better definitions for them). How do you know if a model is structured or not???? I think, that there is not such thing as structured or unstructured models. I think the DESCRIPTION is structured or not. --Alexandra Kuhn 08:12, 10 June 2008 (EEST) |