Multidimensional autoregression |

In seismology the data is usually better than the theory. |

Hermeneutics is the study of the methodological principles of interpretation. Historically, it refers to bible study. Never-the-less, it seems entirely appropriate for Geophysical Estimation. If Albert's book is ``Inverse Problem Theory'' and mine is ``Inverse Problem Practice'', and if the difference between theory and practice is smaller in theory than it is in practice, then there are two fundamental questions:

- In theory, what is the difference between theory and practice? In theory, the difference is data error.
- In practice, what is the difference between theory and practice? One suggestion is that the discrepancy is entirely due to inadequate modeling. It is well known that geophysical data is highly repeatable. The problem is that the modeling neglects far too much.

Here is a perspective drawn from analysis of the human genome:
``The problem is that
it is possible to use empirical data to calibrate a model
that generates simulated data that
is similar to the empirical data.
The point of using such a calibrated model
is to be able to show how strange certain regions are
if they don't fit the simulated distribution,
which is based on the empirical distribution.''
In other words, ``inversion'' is just the process of calibrating a model.
To learn something new we study the *failures* of such models.

Multidimensional autoregression |

2013-07-26