Mathematical modeling:

A model is a representation or an abstraction of a system or a process. We build models because they help us to (1) define our problems, (2) organize our thoughts, (3) understand our data, (4) communicate and test that understanding, and ( ) ma!e predictions. A model is therefore an intellectual tool. "ne of the most important aims for construction of models is to define the problem such that only important details becomes #isible, $hile irrele#ant features are neglected. A road map of the triangle area is an e%ample of a model. &f a motorist understands the symbols that are used in the map, then much information about the region becomes a#ailable in a pac!age small enough to carry around in one's poc!et. (he motorist can use the map, for e%ample, to plan a route from the mathematics department at )*+ to ,arrelson hall at *+-). (he road map is one representation of many important features of the region. .ut it omits many other features that may not be crucial. /ost road maps do not contain sufficient information to tell a motorist $hat is the speediest route to ta!e bet$een t$o points during the morning rush hour. (he map is also almost useless to a door0to0door encyclopedia salesperson $ho $ishes to find neighborhoods $hose social and economic characteristics indicate good selling opportunities. 1or this purpose, a different !ind of model of the region is needed. A mathematical model of a comple% phenomenon or situation has many of the ad#antages and limitations of other types of models. -ome factors in the situation $ill be omitted $hile others are stressed. When constructing a mathematical system, the modeler must !eep in mind the type of information he or she $ishes to obtain from it. (he role that mathematical models play in science can be illustrated by the relati#ely simple schematic diagram of 1igure 1.

Real world

Abstraction (A)

Mathematical system

Eksperiments (E)

Logical argument (L)

Real world conclusions

Interpretation (I)

Mathematical conclusions

(he scientist begins $ith some obser#ations about the real $orld. ,e or she $ishes to ma!e some conclusions or predictions about the situation he or she has obser#ed. "ne $ay to proceed (2) is to conduct some e%periments and record the results. (he model builder follo$s a different path. 1irst, he or she abstracts, or translates, some of the essential features of the real $orld into a mathematical system. (hen by logical argument (3) he or she deri#es some mathematical conclusions. (hese conclusions are then interpreted (&) as predictions about the real $orld. (o be useful, the mathematical system should predict conclusions about the real $orld that are actually obser#ed $hen appropriate e%periments are carried out. &f the predictions from the model bear little resemblance to $hat actually occurs in the real $orld, then the model is not a good one. (he modeler has not isolated the critical features of the situation being studied or the a%ioms misrepresent the relations among these features. "n the other hand, if there is good agreement bet$een $hat is obser#ed and $hat the model predicts, then there is some reason to belie#e that the mathematical system does indeed capture correctly important aspects of the real0$orld situation. What happens 4uite fre4uently is that some of the predictions of a mathematical model agree 4uite closely $ith obser#ed e#ents, $hile other predictions do not agree $ith the obser#ed e#ents. &n such a case, $e might hope to modify the model to impro#e its accuracy. (he incorrect predictions may suggest $ays of rethin!ing the assumptions of the mathematical system. "ne hopes that the re#ised model $ill not only preser#e the correct predictions of the original one, but that it $ill also ma!e further correct predictions. (he incorrect inferences of the re#ised model $ill lead, in turn, to yet another #ersion, more sophisticated more accurate than the pre#ious one. ,o$e#er, it is important to !eep in mind, that the goal is not to ma!e the most precise model of the part of the $orld that is modeled, but that the model (li!e the road map) includes all the essential features, e#en if that means that some other features in the model do not present the reality. 1or e%ample, a model of the cardio#ascular system (the heart, arteries, and #eins) could accurately present the systemic arteries and #eins and then lump the pulmonary circulation into a single compartment. -uch a compartment $ould ne#er represent any of the subsystems correctly. When building mathematical models one should distinguish bet$een the different types of models, some models (deterministic models) can be deri#ed directly from physical la$s (e.g. *e$ton's second la$), $hile other models are based on empirical obser#ations. .oth types of models pro#ide insight into the system modeled, but the type of model must be considered carefully. 1or e%ample, #ery different types of models are used for predict the $eather tomorro$ and to determine a roc!ets tra5ectory to the moon. ,olling (1678) has a diagram (1igure 2) that pro#ides a simple and useful classification of problems. (he horizontal a%is represents ho$ $ell $e understand the problem $e are trying to sol#e9 the #ertical a%is represents the 4uality and:or 4uantity of rele#ant data (1igure 2). ,olling di#ides the 4uadrant bet$een the t$o a%es into four areas, corresponding to four classes of problems.

1
#ata

4
"nderstanding
Area 1 is a region $ith good data but little understanding. (his is $here statistical techni4ues are useful9 they enable one to analyze the data search for patterns or relation, construct and test hypotheses, and so on. Area 3 is a region $ith good data and good understanding. /any problems in engineering and the physical sciences (for e%ample, the problem of computing a roc!ets tra5ectory to the moon) belong to this class of problems. (his is the area $here models are used routinely and $ith confidence because their effecti#eness has been pro#ed repeatedly. Area 2 has little in the $ay of supporting data but there is some understanding of the structure of the problem. Area 4, in this area there is little !no$ledge of the structure of the problem and little data to support it. )nfortunately, many problems in the nonphysical sciences (especially in the biological sciences) belong to areas 2 and 4. ,o$e#er, recent e%plosion in e%perimental techni4ues mo#e some of these problems to areas 1 and 3. (he main difference from the physical problems is the uncertainty and high le#els of noise often found in the data. (he modeling challenges for problems in area 2 and 4 are; 0 0 <ecisions may ha#e to be made despite the lac! of data and understanding. ,o$ do $e ma!e good, scientific decision under these circumstances= ,o$ do $e go about impro#ing our understanding and suggest ne$ $ays for collecting the data necessary to #alidate the modeling. (his is an area $here modeling can be used to predict ne$ e%perimental settings.

/odels that lie in areas 2 and 4 are bound to be speculati#e. (hey $ill ne#er ha#e the respectability of models build for sol#ing problems in area 3 because it is unli!ely they $ill be sufficiently accurate of that they can e#er be tested conclusi#ely. &n fact most models in biology cannot be tested conclusi#ely, $hile $e ha#e a lot more data today that 2> years ago there are still many types of data that could #alidate models, but that are unethical to measure. /odels build this $ay should ne#er be used un4uestioningly or automatically. (he $hole process of building and using these models has to be that much more thoughtful because $e do not really understand the structure of the problem and do not ha#e (and cannot easily get) supporting data. We therefore build models to e%plore the conse4uences of $hat $e belie#e to be true. (hose $ho ha#e a lot of data and little understanding of their problem (area 1) gain understanding by ?li#ing $ith@ their data, loo!ing at it in different $ays, and searching for patterns and relationships. .ecause $e ha#e so little data in areas 2 and 4, $e learn by li#ing $ith our models, by e%ercising them, manipulating them, 4uestioning their rele#ance, and comparing their beha#ior $ith $hat $e !no$ (or thin! $e !no$) about the real $orld. (his process often forces us to ree#aluate our beliefs, and that ree#aluation in turn leads to ne$ #ersions off the models. (he mere act of assembling the pieces and building a model (ho$e#er speculati#e the model might be) usually impro#es our understanding and enables us to find or use data $e had not realized $ere rele#ant. (hat in turn leads us to a better model. (he process is one of boot0strapping; &f $e begin $ith little data and understanding in the bottom left0hand corner of ,olling's diagram, models help us to zigzag up$ards and to the right. (his is a far healthier approach than one of 5ust collecting data because $e impro#e our understanding as $e go along. ((hose $ho collect data $ithout building models run the #ery real ris! of disco#ering, $hen they e#entually analyze their data, that they ha#e collected the $rong dataA)

The modeling process:

(he real $orld (a) problem formulation Dart of the real $orld (the problem) (b) -ystem identification -ystem (c) /athematical formulation /athematical system (d) /athematical analysis /odel results (e) &nterpretation and analysis of results Action:&nsight (f) Analysis of the model #alidity

References:
?.A-2 *ote 1@, /orten .lomho5, (inne ,off B5eldsen, Cohnny "ttesen, *atural -ciences .asis Drogram, Eos!ilde )ni#ersity +enter, <enmar!, August 2>>>. ?An &ntroduction to /athematical /odels in the -ocial and 3ife -ciences@, /ichael "linic!, Addison0Wesley Dublishing +ompany, /assachusetts, 1678. ?.uilding /odels for +onser#ation and Wildlife /anagement@, -econd edition, A./. -tarfield, A.3. .leloch, .urgess &nternational Froup &nc., /innesota, 1661.