search

uchicago-computation-workshop / ali_hortacsu

0 stars 0 forks source link

Collaboration across disciplines + peripheral cities #6

Open LeosonH opened 6 years ago

LeosonH commented 6 years ago

In the paper, qualitative methods used by historians and Assyriologists are raised as counterparts to the novel methods deployed here. There are cases where “quantitative estimates are remarkably close to qualitative proposals made by historians” and other cases where the “quantitative method supports the suggestions of some historians and rejects that of others.”

In this bridging of disciplines, how does one weigh the confirmatory power of the quantitative estimates? When the quantitative proposals support certain suggestions of historians and rejects others - can we conclude that this lends weight to the abovementioned “suggestions”, or is it possible that there is still not enough information to recommend one over the other by a significant margin? (E.g. Could associative source-based confounds exist between the qualitative methods and the quantitative methods that arrived at similar conclusions?)

Also, might there a feasible way to increase the precision of location estimates for peripheral cities as opposed to central cities? (within the inverse-gravity model or otherwise)

Thank you for presenting!

ChenAnhua commented 6 years ago

I have the same question regarding your point on peripheral cities' precise location.