Creating objective evaluations, or the possibilities of similarity analysis

World Futures Studies Federation (WFSF) 19. World Conference

Creating objective evaluations, or the possibilities of similarity analysis

Pitlik, L., Pető I., Bunkóczi L.

Institute of Business analysis and methodology

University of Gödöllő


Introduction

Futurology Creating futures On the base of ideas or, on models

Modelling Base question: between two models

which is the better? Similarity analysis

Which case is the most similar?


Futurology Creating futures shall not be an ideological, an

unrealistic self objective aim / theory … Than a mix of different sciences, like it has been

defined by itself for the experimental science for centuries.

Thus, the futurology is an experimental science, the fitting of future forecasts can be examined well,

and can be expected that with interpreting the logical errors behind misses, the objective statutories will be recognized with higher and higher safety.


Modelling I. In certain cases an Expert System (logical rules)

can be the same as a model (usually a numerical function) and a model can be transformed to an Expert System. E.g. an Expert System for yield calculation

sometimes is better than a production function

Type of Expert Systems Basing for predefined rules – rule systems Inductive EXS – based on real datasets / phenomena

and the rules are derived from the real life


Modelling II. Which is more appropriate for futures /

forecasting? Both can be good, and sometimes non of them.

What can be a good solution? Creating automated complex and consistent

futures: Complex: all attributes are valued Consistent: the forecasted values are in tight

connection: e.g.: 5,2 t/ha yield of soft wheat may happen but in that case the quantity of rain shall be high and other inputs shall be appropriate too


Similarity analysis Given hundreds of complex and consistent

futures Which is the most probable? Probably those one which are the most

similar to certain past cases. COCO analysis (Component based Object

Consistency for Objectivity) comparison forecasts


Whole cycle of creating futures

First time step:1. generation of automated complex and

consistent forecasts2. similarity analysis: choosing the most

probable one Next time step

evaluation and fining after the plan/fact comparisons

again from the 1. point


Summary With the consistent integration of knowledge from

the patterns of the past (supposed as known), more and more automatic (without ideological basics) deductable the potential (alternative) complex future.

The deduction’s methodology will be able to fine itself after the fact-estimation comparisons and along the complex analysis of the ways toward the comparisons.

The philosophy of the recognized necessity in this way may be able to develop the futurology to an industry like service.


Thank you for your attention

For more details:

http://miau.gau.hu/miau/84/19wfsf_full_en.doc

And

Documents

Creating objective evaluations, or the possibilities of similarity analysis