4.6 Article

Taming the tyranny of scales: models and scale in the geosciences

Journal

SYNTHESE
Volume 199, Issue 5-6, Pages 14167-14199

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11229-021-03416-w

Keywords

Multiscale; Modeling; Simulation; Conceptual model; Physical model; Mathematical model; Scale; Dynamical scaling; Geosciences; Geomorphology; Geohydrology; Representation; Thresholds; Adequacy for purpose; Hierarchy; Similitude; Reductionism; Emergence; Universality; Tyranny of scales

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The challenge of modeling phenomena across multiple spatial and temporal scales, known as the tyranny of scales problem, requires new modeling methods. Drawing on research in the geosciences, strategies for taming this tyranny in conceptual, physical, and mathematical modeling have been synthesized and analyzed. Having an adequate conceptual model is essential in all cases, advancing debates in the philosophy of modeling.
While the predominant focus of the philosophical literature on scientific modeling has been on single-scale models, most systems in nature exhibit complex multiscale behavior, requiring new modeling methods. This challenge of modeling phenomena across a vast range of spatial and temporal scales has been called the tyranny of scales problem. Drawing on research in the geosciences, I synthesize and analyze a number of strategies for taming this tyranny in the context of conceptual, physical, and mathematical modeling. This includes several strategies that can be deployed in physical (table-top) modeling, even when strict dynamical scaling fails. In all cases, I argue that having an adequate conceptual model-given both the nature of the system and the particular purpose of the model-is essential. I draw a distinction between depiction and representation, and use this research in the geosciences to advance a number of debates in the philosophy of modeling.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available