Explanatory model approach

QSAR modeling has been traditionally viewed as an evaluative approach, i.e., with the focus on developing retrospective and explanatory models of existing data. Model extrapolation has been considered only in hypothetical sense in terms of potential modifications of known biologically active chemicals that could improve compounds activity. Nevertheless recent studies suggest that current QSAR methodologies may afford robust and validated models capable of accurate prediction of compound properties for molecules not included in the training sets. 

Hence, the molecular mechanics approach does not fit either of the models of explanation, Salmon s or Lewis we have considered. In the case of the neural network simulation model this seemed to be satisfying. Now it conflicts with the chemist s point of view. The main principle used in the molecular mechanics approach, the principle of steric strain, is used as the major explanatory principle among chemists. But perhaps this use is just erroneous, due to a theoretical simple-mindedness chemists and the ah initio method is a more promising candidate for a correct explanatory model. 

Neural networks map variables into results using a black-box approach and can be used as components of analyses designed to build explanatory models, because they explore data sets in a search for relevant variables or groups of variables the results of such explorations can facilitate the process of model building. Neural networks are capable of approximating any continuous function, and thus a researcher does not need to have a hypothesis about the underlying model. An important... 

SEM statistical frameworks for such studies were examined and first applied to these questions by researchers at the University of Cincinnati (Bornschein et al., 1985 Succop et al., 1998). SEM permits allocation of the variance in a set of interconnected outcomes to those directly affecting the dependent variable and those following indirect pathways. Put differently, the modeling approach stratifies the explanatory variables relevant to lead exposures into exogenous and endogenous variables. Endogenous intermediate variables include dust, soil, and paint Pb, and the principal outcome endogenous variable is PbB. 

This dating can be supported by a comparison with Isaiah s oracles, which are usually considered older, if not even authentic. It is also supported by numerous literary borrowings from the book of Isaiah as well as other biblical literature, which can be found not only in those parts of the narratives which deal with the activities and discourses of the people of Jerusalem, but also in the parts which appear to be particularly Assyrian, such as the speech of the Assyrian officer Rabshakeh. We can only get around the literary evidence by claiming a word pool, which was commonfy available—and therefore also accessible for the propaganda of the Assyrian enemy—and thereby smoothing over the literary cross references. This leads us to the next explanatory model the phenomenological approach. 

The most fertile approaches so far, from the standpoint of predicting y+ in complex solutions from data in simple ones, have been that of Pitzer (H), and the ion-pair approach of Pytkowicz and Kester (2) and of Johnson and Pytkowicz (3). The lattice model of Pytkowicz and Johnson (19) is, at thTs time, an explanatory rather than a predictive tooT. 

However, despite their proven explanatory and predictive capabilities, all well-known MO models for the mechanisms of pericyclic reactions, including the Woodward-Hoffmann rules [1,2], Fukui s frontier orbital theory [3] and the Dewar-Zimmerman treatment [4-6] share an inherent limitation They are based on nothing more than the simplest MO wavefunction, in the form of a single Slater determinant, often under the additional oversimplifying assumptions characteristic of the Hiickel molecular orbital (HMO) approach. It is now well established that the accurate description of the potential surface for a pericyclic reaction requires a much more complicated ab initio wavefunction, of a quality comparable to, or even better than, that of an appropriate complete-active-space self-consistent field (CASSCF) expansion. A wavefunction of this type typically involves a large number of configurations built from orthogonal orbitals, the most important of which i.e. those in the active space) have fractional occupation numbers. Its complexity renders the re-introduction of qualitative ideas similar to the Woodward-Hoffmann rules virtually impossible. 

The majority of the location factors shown in Figure 29 are self-explanatory. While no uniform scale is required when using the pairwise comparison approach in a site selection situation, it has proven helpful to create a joint definition of each attribute that also contains an indication of minimum requirements and ideal state together with all stakeholders involved in the site selection process. To this end, verbal scale descriptions were defined for all sub-objectives. The global scale to use the model for site controlling (see below) was then created based on these definitions. 

To some extent, a disciplinary divide is at work here, as probabilistic models derived from population biology and selection theory differ fundamentally from engineering models, which depend on. .. the surface area of isometric bodies, or the structure of branching networks (McNab, 2002, p. 35). This divide entails differences not only in analytic approach, but also in evaluative criteria that have both polarized the dispute and made it difficult to resolve empirically. However, my point is that these tensions do not require a forced choice between explanatory accounts, which are not intrinsically irreconcilable. Internal constraints may fix the allometric baseline, which selection may modify under certain circumstances. One of the postulates of West and co-workers model is that organisms evolve toward an optimal state in which the energy required for resource distribution is minimized (West and Brown, 2004, p. 38). Toward is the key word here, and the extent to which evolution attains any particular optimality target often reflects compromise with other selective demands physical first principles may constrain what is optimal, but do not always determine what is actual. 

Despite the continuities that I have underlined, there is another point at which Boyle s attitude to form is notably different from that of most alchemical writers, namely in his explicitly polemical use of the distinction between artificial and natural substances as a means of undermining the concept of the substantial form. The basic idea behind Boyle s approach capitalized on the fact that—as the Scholastics habitually put it—art alone could not impose a substantial form. Hence purely artificial bodies, in the Scholastic schema, had no substantial form, but only a superficial forma artificial—a deceptive external appearance of unity. What then if one could produce an artificial imitation of a natural body having all the known qualities of its natural exemplar Would it not follow that the substantial form was a purely otiose concept, since the ersatz product could not be distinguished from the natural except on the gratuitous hypothesis that it lacked the imperceptible substantial form of its natural model More than this, since the qualities of natural bodies were said to flow from the substantial form, how could a Scholastic opponent account for the existence of these very same qualities in a factitious (i.e., artificial) body, since it confessedly lacked a substantial form This approach was a key element to Boyle s assault on substantial forms and his concomitant attempt to demonstrate the mechanical production of forms. If one could eliminate the explanatory power of the substantial form, there was one less obstacle to Boyle s own explanation of qualities—that they derived from the shapes, sizes, and motions of individual corpuscles and from the textures supplied by corpuscular aggregates. Boyle s tactic is spelled out prominently at the very end of The Origin of Forms and Qualities ... 

Accordingly, in all scientific papers where an ab initio calculation could be performed that fits the experimentally observed structure of a molecule, the result is taken to theoretically explain this observation. But what does this mean for the overwhelming number of molecules that are intractable within the ab initio approach Do we have to assume that their structure is, and must remain, unexplained Most chemists would deny this. A look in classical textbooks of chemistry, especially organic chemistry, shows that the most common explanatory principle in the context of the everyday molecular structures does not refer to the Schrodinger equation at all. ft is rather a principle that lies at the heart of the molecular mechanics model the principle of steric strain. 

The Molecular Mechanics Model illustrates how chemists proceed when they try to explain molecular structures. It turns out that explanation remains an issue here and that mere prediction, as in the case of the neural network approach, is not, eo ipso, explanatorily relevant. On the other hand it is remarkable that not a single, but rather two conceptually quite different models were both praised for their explanatory... 

In considering each of these five themes, relevant literature on learners alternative conceptions about bonding is reviewed, and the teaching models and approaches considered to encourage such ideas are considered. The chapter considers recommendations for the way in which the topic should be taught to minimise the incidence of these alternative conceptions, and to encourage learners to develop models of chemical bonding which are more authentic, and which consequently have more explanatory power. 

---