<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CoSMoS Research &#187; CoSMoS</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cosmos-research.org/tag/cosmos/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cosmos-research.org</link>
	<description>Complex Systems Modelling and Simulation Infrastructure</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 15:10:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>When Argumentation meets Science</title>
		<link>http://www.cosmos-research.org/when-argumentation-meets-science/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cosmos-research.org/when-argumentation-meets-science/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:51:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Teodor Ghetiu</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[argumentation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CoSMoS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GSN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plant ecology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cosmos-research.org/?p=448</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Science is, in theory, &#8220;nice and principled&#8221;. We have the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method">scientific method</a> to guide experimentation, we have <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_hypothesis">null hypothesis testing</a>, so one could say nothing can really go wrong. What we get is what is &#8220;out there&#8221;. That is in theory, of course&#8230;</p>
<p>Coming back to good-old reality, things are not exactly perfect. First of all, we have the omnipresent sampling effect &#8211; our <em>certainty</em> over particular experimental results is always limited by measurement errors. Secondly, the way data is aggregated and conclusions drawn, may be <em>biased: </em>assumptions taken for granted, methods that are not really applicable to the given context, etc. <em>Transparency</em> is an issue. Finally, one of the biggest fish in the pond is the issue of <em>scaling</em>: drawing conclusions for large-scale systems, from small-scale observations.</p>
<p>From all this cloud of dust, argumentation techniques come to the rescue. They have been around for some time, especially in the domain [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cosmos-research.org/when-argumentation-meets-science/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->