<div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal">Dare I submit another wordy musing about the subject. Yeah, I guess.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So back to the implications for the common definition(s) of
the word population provided by Tony. I
now think I understand and agree with Olaf
that it is a noun and further is likely to be a good term for the OBJECT
of WHAT you all do. At the same time I
am even less inclined to like it as an adjective to modify either what, nor to
a lesser extent, HOW you do it. Maybe you just simply (kidding) model
population, or perhaps more correctly computationally model populations. In that line of thinking we must recognize
that there are people who do physical, and conceptual models of entities,
organic or material, that could be called models or at least subsets of models
of populations. Especially true when
considering that historically all models of any kind only represented a SAMPLE
of a larger population. Thus paintings
of crowds, or terrain models of forests are non-computational models
representing entities which are members of a population, and that they are useful
for communicating to others. So what
makes what you do different or at least distinctive? Is it that you model in “quantitative materials” which themselves
represent characteristics of entities (living or not) in a form that can be
manipulated in computations just as the sculptor does in ‘clay’ to make a model
that can be perceived and even manipulated by others who know how to USE the
material. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Scientists have used computational (even before computers
existed) to model populations using quantitative representations of
distinguishing qualitative features of entities in the population for a long
time. So now I’m back to thinking that
what is different here is that instead of modeling a representational subset of
a populations as a group relying on estimates of the distribution of the values
represent characteristics of interest, you are trying to create the
representation of a population of entities by modeling the representation of
each individual member of the population such that your collection of synthetic
entities becomes your population for research, and perhaps in so doing creating
such huge populations of these individual representations, that you still
‘sample’ from it. But I understand that
what you intend to do someday given available and future computational power
(both hardware and software), is to not have to sample in a statistical sense,
but rather conduct experiments, build models using individual entities, and
answer questions about the nature of things (entities) never thinkable before
because you treat each and every entity individually in the modeling. (Humm, No
such thing as ‘outliers’ (?)) So
perhaps the key to differentiating what you do is as simple as saying you do
not start out treating populations as collections, or groups (per the
dictionary definition of population) but as individuals. With the advantage of being able to create
populations of individual entities with whatever characteristics you want. And
then do modeling of any kind that uses them.
How would that be different from Agent based modeling other than in the
numbers of agents you can create in a population and perhaps some degree of
granularity in the description of your agents vs. legacy (?) agent modelers and
the ability to include all in stead of sampling from the population. So maybe what you do Individual Entity
Based, Synthetic Population Modeling.
IEBSPM (does not pronounce well.)
I would think that there are two kinds of synthetic population entities. Those generated from models themselves, and
those generated somehow from real (BIG) data and maybe augmented by synthetic
components to fill assumptions about data that is not available. Either way, the essence will be in the
validity of the individual entities. And that you have two major components to
what you do, one creating, and the other modeling for research using the
populations of individually modeled entities.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I know, Jacob, I use too many words. But then I am no more
an elegant writer than lots of people I know who are not elegant programmer
that can use short code. <span style="font-family:Wingdings">J</span> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> So I will add one
more thought to this. As the outside
observer, I read about (computational) modeling and simulation being the NEW
SCIENCE. It’s interesting. And for now I think that means a new
SCIENTIFIC METHOD that will take its place beside or in some cases maybe render
obsolete, classical “Scientific” Observation, Experimentation, (“wet labs
science experiments”) and other paradigms called out in the history of the
philosophy of science. I noticed there
is a group, which is trying to work specifically on getting computational
modeling recognized as SCIENCE.
Particularly germane in the case of many of you who look to establish
the credibility of Computational Science within the FDA. ????</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Aside: maybe need to be careful to make a distinction
between “Computer Scientists” (engineers and software types that create
hardware and control code) and “Computational Scientists who USE the computers
if that is not already very clear. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">John </p></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 5:05 AM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news-request@simtk.org" target="_blank">popmodwkgrpimag-news-request@simtk.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Send PopModWkGrpIMAG-news mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org">popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news" target="_blank">https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news-request@simtk.org">popmodwkgrpimag-news-request@simtk.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news-owner@simtk.org">popmodwkgrpimag-news-owner@simtk.org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of PopModWkGrpIMAG-news digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. PopModWkGrpIMAG-news Digest, Vol 3, Issue 17 (Hunt, C. Anthony)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 20:13:51 +0000<br>
From: "Hunt, C. Anthony" <<a href="mailto:a.hunt@ucsf.edu">a.hunt@ucsf.edu</a>><br>
Subject: [Population Modeling] PopModWkGrpIMAG-news Digest, Vol 3,<br>
Issue 17<br>
To: "<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org">popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org">popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org</a>><br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:D0E14B56.2A387F%25a.hunt@ucsf.edu">D0E14B56.2A387F%a.hunt@ucsf.edu</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
I offer some musings regarding defining population modeling (PM).<br>
Population modeling is an activity. For members of this group it is a<br>
process with a purpose. Identifying this group's PM process purposes will<br>
help to define what PM means to us.<br>
<br>
Given those purposes, the processes employed by members of this group are<br>
drawn from a relatively specialized set of methods. Identifying the<br>
group's method's will further define what PM means to us.<br>
<br>
Given those two constraints, I think that Merriam-Webster Unabridged<br>
definitions of population are adequate (for our needs):<br>
<br>
1 a : the whole number of people or inhabitants occupying a specific<br>
geographical locality (as an institution, a country, a world)<br>
[I might replace "people or inhabitants" with entities]<br>
1 b : the total number or amount of things especially within a given area<br>
<br>
2 : the act or process of populating<br>
[may apply only rarely]<br>
<br>
3 a : a body of persons having some quality or characteristic in common<br>
and usually thought of as occupying a particular area<br>
[I might replace "persons" with entities, and (this is minor) "area" with<br>
space]<br>
3 b (1) : the organisms inhabiting a particular area or biotope<br>
3 b (2) : a group of interbreeding biotypes that represents the level of<br>
organization at which speciation begins<br>
<br>
4 mathematics : a group of individual persons, objects, or items from<br>
which samples are taken for measurement statistically<br>
<br>
<br>
-T-<br>
<br>
On 1/17/15 2:06 AM, "<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news-request@simtk.org">popmodwkgrpimag-news-request@simtk.org</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news-request@simtk.org">popmodwkgrpimag-news-request@simtk.org</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
>Today's Topics:<br>
><br>
> 1. Re: Population modeling definition (Jacob Barhak)<br>
><br>
><br>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
><br>
>Message: 1<br>
>Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 04:07:08 -0600<br>
>From: Jacob Barhak <<a href="mailto:jacob.barhak@gmail.com">jacob.barhak@gmail.com</a>><br>
>Subject: Re: [Population Modeling] Population modeling definition<br>
>To: Talitha Feenstra <<a href="mailto:talitha.feenstra@rivm.nl">talitha.feenstra@rivm.nl</a>><br>
>Cc: <a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org">popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org</a><br>
>Message-ID:<br>
> <CAM_y+3S_D1e1GhKA_8C8zvTeijA2_3nEupq61Jx1h-=<a href="mailto:s6mmGAA@mail.gmail.com">s6mmGAA@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
><br>
>Hi Talitha, Hi John, Hi Olaf, Hi Steve, Hi Stephan, Hi Al, and greeting to<br>
>all others who have not participated yet.<br>
><br>
>You have contributed thoughts to this discussion. I would like to point to<br>
>two issues I see and add a third issue to the discussion<br>
><br>
>1. Dictionary like definition:<br>
>John and Olaf are trying to define the term like a dictionary. In this<br>
>perspective, I myself would interpret population as: "A collection of X"<br>
>where X can change as Madhav suggested before. It is probably a noun<br>
>describing plurality of X.<br>
><br>
>2. Definition by Models included:<br>
>However, perhaps a more interesting discussion is what kind of models fall<br>
>into our category. I recall Al and Steve trying to include Markov models,<br>
>while Talitha and previously Stephan are excluding Markov Cohort models<br>
>from falling within our definition of population modeling. This is to the<br>
>best of my understating and I am surprised that Talitha suggested a strict<br>
>definition since she some of her work is Markov model based.<br>
><br>
>What would you all feel about including Markov models within population<br>
>modeling only if they stratify the cohort by age, gender, and/or other<br>
>parameters. And non stratified models will define these as cohort models<br>
>outside population modeling?<br>
><br>
>3. Modeling of individual uncertainty<br>
>This is another question. Would we consider description of uncertainty of<br>
>parameters in an individual within our population modeling group? For<br>
>example, does defining distribution of height of a person by mean,<br>
>variance, and distribution function fall into our category? After all we<br>
>are modeling a single entity from information derived from a population. I<br>
>would say yes, especially if the information is extracted from a<br>
>population<br>
>that we can name. But what about correlation between anthropometric<br>
>features such as defining the mean ratio between height and arm length as<br>
>one number? Will one number be sufficient to call it population modeling<br>
>or do we need a distribution? I would say if the number is associated to a<br>
>population cohort then perhaps, and defiantly yes if we have several<br>
>numbers associated with different population cohorts.<br>
><br>
>I am interested to learn more what others think of those questions. I hope<br>
>others will join this discussion.<br>
><br>
> Jacob<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PopModWkGrpIMAG-news mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org">PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org</a><br>
<a href="https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news" target="_blank">https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news</a><br>
<br>
<br>
End of PopModWkGrpIMAG-news Digest, Vol 3, Issue 20<br>
***************************************************<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">“Where there is much desire to learn, here of necessity will be much arguing, <br>much writing, many opinions; for opinion in good men is but knowledge in the making.”<br>John Milton (1608 – 1674)<br><br>Cellular 757 318 0671<br></div>
</div>