1/ Hot take: Very often I think Computational Social Science (my field) is useful more for the training and how it teaches you to think than the methods.https://twitter.com/EpiEllie/status/1113850007248097280 …
-
Show this thread
-
2/ Don't get me wrong, the methods *are* useful. But the years of training and experimentation that force you to constantly think about near-decomposable processes which have endlessly surprising and emergent effects irrevocably improves and expands your thinking and perception.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫 Retweeted Sean J. Taylor
3/ I think this is true in all scholarly fields, but the weight of methodological value vs thinking-as-a-process value may be more skewed to the latter for CSS than in most fields. (Although, that may be changing.)https://twitter.com/seanjtaylor/status/1113475247431278593 …
💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫 added,
Sean J. Taylor @seanjtaylorSome of the most exciting work at Facebook in the last year: combining expensive sources of measurement (A/B tests) with much cheaper sources (offline simulations) in order to optimize policies. Great work@_bletham_ and@eytan! https://ai.facebook.com/blog/online-and-offline-tests-to-improve-news-feed-ranking/ … pic.twitter.com/BkLpjmyzm2Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Aelkus
Oh really? I didn't know that but it makes obvious sense.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Yea. Every time I did SBP/BRiMS I was always impressed by the extent of one particular fields usage of ABMs.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.