A
Anonymous01/14/26, 02:41No.1689123990% of junk science in social sciences are because of this shit.
Who ever came up with the retarded idea to try to statistically model dynamic processes as linear equations?
37
Replies
A
Anon01/14/26, 04:15No.16891276
I think the fundamental issue with "social sciences" is they're essentially philosophy masquerading as science. And there's nothing wrong with philosophical endeavors, but I'm sick of psychologists and economists and sociologists peddling their shaky theories and suppositions as hard science.
A
Anon01/14/26, 05:08No.16891310
its useful for composite calculations like FSIQ though thats the only context in which I know factor analysis
A
Anon01/14/26, 05:13No.16891313
blame philosophy
A
Anon01/14/26, 06:52No.16891381
Its a bit better than PCA alone right becuase you account for errors in variables.also you'd be surprised what you can do with linear methods.linear methods are good becuase they are fast and you can reason about them.
the moment you pull out non linear stuff it gets very hard, unless you can do some dimensional analysis like is common in chemical engineering (look up buckingham pi).linear ain't perfect but at least you can reason about it.trust me this stuff is better than throwing AI at everything, and thats what people do these days.the amount of junk papers that just use an ANN or what ever to model shit is insane, literally useless publications
A
Anon01/14/26, 09:47No.16891473
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wX5II-BJ8hI
A
Anon01/14/26, 10:19No.16891488
apparently a correlation of .76 of APM is irrelevant as a test of g the only variable of main pattern recognition in the phenomenon of psychometrics doesnt mean jack delly shit ok so what now we dont believe regression? you know your shitty chatgpt account uses regression nigga KERNELS
A
Anon01/14/26, 12:52No.16891640
makes no fucking sense chatgpt lied to me fucking bullshit
A
Anon01/14/26, 13:01No.16891648
yeah nigga buckingham pi is a pile of shit none of this makes any sense my chatgpt was hallucinating the equations and dimensionality of selecting input variables is manual theres no automation so there is nothing like PCA going on with a custom calculation all shieet
A
Anon01/16/26, 08:38No.16892880
Linearity is proportionality.
You would be suprised at how many things in real life are proportional with one another (with diminishing returns at the ends).
In any case, they are not studying "what function best interpolates this", they are studying proportionality between X and Y.
A
Anon01/16/26, 09:16No.16892896
>Who ever came up with the retarded idea to try to statistically model dynamic processes as linear equations?
Low IQ thread.
A
Anon01/16/26, 16:41No.16893089
Boudieu was a big offender. He really liked MCA and claimed it was much more that what it is.
A
Anon01/16/26, 20:24No.16893230
I think the dimensionality reducer pi theorem is gay as fuck
A
Anon01/20/26, 06:37No.16895252
i am a brainlet
but wouldn't this only work if you made factors for every possible subset of the given variables, thus exploding your problem complexity to an exponential degree and wiping out any gains in calculation efficiency?
seems like if this was reliable at all even with proven correlations and a huge amount of empirical data... using it to predict the weather with a small sub-samble of weather data would be trivial.i think "can it be used to accurately model and thus predict some part of the weather over even medium timescales" should be the real litmus test for how useful stuff like this is in understanding complex systems. that dataset is continuously generated at high reliability and has a ton of advantages over most sociological data, so if your "i don't want to admit this data is basically worthless for empirical mathematical study" modeling trick can't do the weather it probably can't be more accurate about sociological systems with less and worse data.