Mathematical models: a state of exception

References

• Akaike, Hirotugu. 2011. ‘Akaike’s Information Criterion’. In International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science, edited by M. Lovric, 25. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04898-2_110.
   Google Scholar
• Bauer, Peter, Bjorn Stevens, and Wilco Hazeleger. 2021. “A Digital Twin of Earth for the Green Transition.” Nature Climate Change 11 (2): 80–83. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-00986-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borges, Jorge Luis. 1946. ‘Del Rigor En La Ciencia (On Exactitude in Science)’. https://ciudadseva.com/texto/del-rigor-en-la-ciencia/.
   Google Scholar
• Borges, Jorge Luis. 1998. The Garden of Forking Paths. London: Penguin Books. https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/308559/the-garden-of-forking-paths-by-borges-jorge-luis/9780241339053.
   Google Scholar
• Boumans, Marcel. 1999. ‘Built-In Justification’. In Models As Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science, edited by Mary S. Morgan and Margaret Morrison, 66–96. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Les héritiers. Paris: MINUIT.
   Google Scholar
• Brauneis, Robert, and Ellen P. Goodman. 2018. ‘Algorithmic Transparency for the Smart City’. Yale Journal of Law and Technology 20:103–176.
   Google Scholar
• Breznau, Nate, Eike Mark Rinke, Alexander Wuttke, Hung H. V. Nguyen, Muna Adem, Jule Adriaans, Amalia Alvarez-Benjumea, et al. 2022. “Observing Many Researchers Using the Same Data and Hypothesis Reveals a Hidden Universe of Uncertainty.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119 (44): e2203150119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2203150119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruno, Isabelle, E. Didier, and J. Prévieux. 2014. Statactivisme. Comment Lutter Avec Des Nombres. Paris: Édition La Découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno, Isabelle, Emmanuel Didier, and Tommaso Vitale. 2014. ‘Editorial: Statactivism: Forms of Action Between Disclosure and Affirmation’. The Open Journal of Sociopolitical Studies 2 (7): 198–220. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20356609v7i2p198.
   Google Scholar
• Chalmers, Iain, and Paul Glasziou. 2009. “Avoidable Waste in the Production and Reporting of Research Evidence.” The Lancet 374 (9683): 86–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60329-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chubin, Daryl E. 2001. ”Filling the Policy Vacuum Created by OTA’s Demise“. Issues in Science and Technology 17 (2).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Concialdi, Pierre. 2014. ‘Le BIP40: Alerte Sur La Pauvreté’. In Statactivisme. Comment Lutter Avec Des Nombres, In edited by E. Didier Isabelle Bruno and J. Prévieux, 199–211. Paris: Édition La Découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, Philip J., and Reuben Hersh. 1986. Descartes’ Dream: The World According to Mathematics (Dover Science Books) - Harvard Book Store. London: Penguin Books. https://www.harvard.com/book/descartes_dream_the_world_according_to_mathematics_dover_science_books/.
   Google Scholar
• Desrosières, Alain. 1998. The Politics of Large Numbers : A History of Statistical Reasoning. Paris: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Devlin, Hannah, and Sarah Boseley. 2020. ‘Scientists Criticise UK Government’s “Following the Science” Claim’. The Guardian, April 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/23/scientists-criticise-uk-government-over-following-the-science.
   Google Scholar
• Di Fiore, Monica, Marta Kuc Czarnecka, Samuele Lo Piano, Arnald Puy, and Andrea Saltelli. 2022. ‘The Challenge of Quantification: An Interdisciplinary Reading’. Minerva 61 (1): 53–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-022-09481-w.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duhem, Pierre Maurice Marie. 1991. The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Princeton University Press. https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691025247/the-aim-and-structure-of-physical-theory.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, Paul N. 1999. “Global Climate Science, Uncertainty and Politics: Data‐Laden Models, Model‐Filtered Data.” Science as Culture 8 (4): 437–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505439909526558.
   Google Scholar
• Eker, Sibel, Elena Rovenskaya, Michael Obersteiner, and Simon Langan. 2018. “Practice and Perspectives in the Validation of Resource Management Models.” Nature Communications 9 (1): 5359. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07811-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feyerabend, Paul. 1988. Farewell to Reason. Illustrated edition. London ; New York: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Feynman, Richard P. 1985 Surely you’re joking, Mr. Feynman! (New York, USA: W.W. Norton and Company.) 400 978-0393355628
   Google Scholar
• Funtowicz, Silvio, and Jerome R. Ravetz. 1990. Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy. Dordrecht: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0621-1_3.
   Google Scholar
• Gelman, Andrew, and Eric Loken. 2013. ‘The Garden of Forking Paths’. Working Paper Department of Statistics, Columbia University. http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/unpublished/p_hacking.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, Gerd. 2018. “Statistical Rituals: The Replication Delusion and How We Got There.” Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science 1 (2): 198–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918771329.
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, Gerd, and J. N. Marewski. 2014. ‘Surrogate Science: The Idol of a Universal Method for Scientific Inference’. Journal of Management, (2): 0149206314547522. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314547522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, Charles A. S. 2020. ‘Systems Ecology and Limits to Growth: History, Models, and Present Status’. In Handbook of Systems Sciences, edited by Gary S. Metcalf, Kyoichi Kijima, and Hiroshi Deguchi, 1–38. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0370-8_77-1.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, Charles A. S., and John W. Day. 1977. Ecosystem Modeling in Theory and Practice: An Introduction with Case Histories. First Edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Hornberger, G. M., and R. C. Spear. 1981. ‘An Approach to the Preliminary Analysis of Environmental Systems’. Journal of Environmental Management 12 (1): 7–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ioannidis, John P. A. 2022. “Pre-Registration of Mathematical Models.” Mathematical Biosciences 345 (March): 108782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mbs.2022.108782.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jakeman, A. J., R. A. Letcher, and J. P. Norton. 2006. ‘Ten Iterative Steps in Development and Evaluation of Environmental Models. Environmental Modelling & Software 21 (5): 602–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2006.01.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, Gareth, Daniela Witten, Trevor Hastie, and Robert Tibshirani. 2017. An Introduction to Statistical Learning : With Applications in R. New York, USA: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kantor, Jodi, Arya Sundaram, Aliza Aufrichtig, and Rumsey Taylor. 2022. ‘The Rise of the Worker Productivity Score’. The New York Times, 15 August 2022. Business. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/08/14/business/worker-productivity-tracking.html.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy, Peter. 2008. A Guide to Econometrics. 6th ed. Oxford, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Kerr, Norbert L. 1998. “HARKing: Hypothesizing After the Results Are Known.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 2 (3): 196–217. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lakoff, George, and Rafael Núñez. 2001. Where Mathematics Come From: How the Embodied Mind Brings Mathematics into Being. Basic Books. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/53337.Where_Mathematics_Come_From.
   Google Scholar
• Landler, Mark, and Stephen Castle. 2020. Behind the Virus Report That Jarred the U.S. and the U.K. to Action - The New York Times. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/world/europe/coronavirus-imperial-college-johnson.html.
   Google Scholar
• Lane, S. N., N. Odoni, C. Landström, S. J. Whatmore, N. Ward, and S. Bradley. 2011. “Doing Flood Risk Science Differently: An Experiment in Radical Scientific Method.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 36 (1): 15–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2010.00410.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leamer, Edward E. 1985. ‘Sensitivity Analyses Would Help’. The American Economic Review 75 (3): 308–313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leamer, Edward E. 2010. “Tantalus on the Road to Asymptopia.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 24 (2): 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.24.2.31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo Piano, Samuele, János Máté Lőrincz, Arnald Puy, Steve Pye, Andrea Saltelli, Stefán Thor Smith, and Jeroen P. van der Sluijs. 2023. ‘Unpacking Uncertainty in the Modelling Process for Energy Policy Making’. Risk Analysis, November. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/risa.14248.
   Google Scholar
• Lo Piano, Samuele, Razi Sheikholeslami, Arnald Puy, and Andrea Saltelli. 2022. ‘Unpacking the Modelling Process via Sensitivity Auditing’. Futures, (September). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.103041. 144 103041
   Google Scholar
• Marris, Claire 2001. ‘Final Report of the PABE Research Project Funded by the Commission of the European Communities, Contract Number: FAIR CT98-3844 (DG 12–SSMI)’. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52001DC0098.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, Felix. 2018. ‘Unelected Power: Banking’s Biggest Dilemma’. New Statemen, 13 June 2018. https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2018/06/unelected-power-banking-s-biggest-dilemma.
   Google Scholar
• McQuillan, Dan. 2022. Resisting AI: An Anti-Fascist Approach to Artificial Intelligence. Bristol University Press. https://www.amazon.es/Resisting-AI-Anti-fascist-Artificial-Intelligence/dp/1529213495.
   Google Scholar
• Mennicken, Andrea, and Wendy Nelson Espeland. 2019. “What’s New with Numbers? Sociological Approaches to the Study of Quantification.” Annual Review of Sociology 45 (1): 223–245. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041343.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mennicken, Andrea, and Robert Salais, eds. 2022. The New Politics of Numbers: Utopia, Evidence and Democracy. London, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Merton, R. K. 1973. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Edited by Chicago, Illinois, USA: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moeller, H. G. 2006. Luhmann Explained. Chicago, Illinois, USA: Open Court Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, Mary S., and Margaret Morrison, eds. 1999. Models As Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morrison, Foster. 1991. The art of modeling dynamic systems: Forecasting for chaos, randomness, and determinism, 414. Mineola, New York, USA: Dover Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Morrison, Margaret, and May S. Morgan 1999. ‘Models As Mediating Instruments.’ In Models As Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science, edited by Mary S. Morgan and Margaret Morrison, 10–37. Cambridg New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Muller, Jerry Z. 2018. The Tyranny of Metrics. Princeton, New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Munafò, M. R., B. A. Nosek, D. V. Bishop, K. S. Button, C. D. Chambers, N. Percie du Sert, U. Simonsohn, E. J. Wagenmakers, J. J. Ware, and J. P. A. Ioannidis. 2017. ‘A Manifesto for Reproducible Science’. Nature Human Behaviour 1 (1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oberkampf, William L., and Christopher J. Roy. 2010. Verification and Validation in Scientific Computing. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neil, Cathy. 2016. Weapons of Math Destruction : How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. New York, USA: Random House Publishing Group.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neill, R. V. 1971. ‘Error Analysis of Ecological Models’. In Radionuclides in Ecosystems, Proceedings of the Third National Symposium in Radioecology, edited by D. J. Nelson, 898–907. Oak Ridge - Tenn.
   Google Scholar
• Oreskes, Naomi. 2010. ‘Why Predict? Historical Perspectives on Prediction in Earth Sciences’. In Prediction, Science, Decision Making and the Future of Nature, edited by Daniel R. Sarewitz, Roger A. Pielke, and Radford Byerly, 23–40. Island Press. http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/6815576?selectedversion=NBD21322691.
   Google Scholar
• Padilla, Jose J, Saikou Y Diallo, Christopher J Lynch, and Ross Gore. 2018. “Observations on the Practice and Profession of Modeling and Simulation: A Survey Approach.” Simulation 94 (6): 493–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037549717737159.
   Google Scholar
• Page, Scott E. 2018. The Model Thinker: What You Need to Know to Make Data Work for You. 1st edition. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Pfleiderer, Paul. 2020. “Chameleons: The Misuse of Theoretical Models in Finance and Economics.” Economica 87 (345): 81–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.12295.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pielke, Roger, Jr. 2020. ‘The Mudfight Over ‘Wild-Ass’ Covid Numbers Is Pathological’. Wired, April. https://www.wired.com/story/the-mudfight-over-wild-ass-covid-numbers-is-pathological/.
   Google Scholar
• Pilkey, Orrin H., and L. Pilkey-Jarvis. 2009a. Useless Arithmetic: Why Environmental Scientists Can’t Predict the Future. New York, USA: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pilkey, Orrin H., and L. Pilkey-Jarvis. 2009b. ‘Yucca Mountain: A Million Years of Safety’. In Useless Arithmetic: Why Environmental Scientists Can’t Predict the Future, 45–65. New York, USA: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• ‘Planet Normal: Bob Seely MP on the “national Scandal” of “Hysterical” Covid Modelling’. 2022. Planet Normal, the Telegraph. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyASSAfdM18.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, Theodore M. 1995. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton University Press. https://books.google.es/books?id=oK0QpgVfIN0C.
   Google Scholar
• Porter, Theodore M. 2012. ‘Funny Numbers’. Culture Unbound 4:585–598. (4) https://doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.124585.
   Google Scholar
• Puy, Arnald, Pierfrancesco Beneventano, Simon A. Levin, Samuele Lo Piano, Tommaso Portaluri, and Andrea Saltelli. 2022. ‘Models with Higher Effective Dimensions Tend to Produce More Uncertain Estimates’. Science Advances 8 (eabn9450). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abn9450.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Puy, Arnald, Samuele Lo Piano, and Andrea Saltelli. 2020. “Current Models Underestimate Future Irrigated Areas.” Geophysical Research Letters 47 (8): e2020GL087360. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL087360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qi, Liyan. 2024. ‘How China Miscalculated Its Way to a Baby Bust’. WSJ, 12 February 2024. World. https://www.wsj.com/world/china/china-population-births-economy-one-child-c5b95901.
   Google Scholar
• Quine, W. V. O. 1951. “Two Dogmas of Empiricism.” The Philosophical Review 60 (1951): 20–43. Reprinted in W.V.O. Quine, From a Logical Point of View (Harvard University Press, 1953; second, revised, edition 1961).
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz, Jerome R. 1971. Scientific Knowledge and Its Social Problems. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz, Jerome R. 2008. ‘Faith and Reason in the Mathematics of the Credit Crunch’. The Oxford Magazine. Eight Week, Michaelmas Term 14–16. http://www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue35/ravetz.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz, Jerome R. 2023. ‘Models As Metaphors’. In The Politics of Modelling. Numbers Between Science and Policy, edited by Andrea Saltelli and Monica Di Fiore. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, Steve. 2012. “Uncomfortable Knowledge: The Social Construction of Ignorance in Science and Environmental Policy Discourses.” Economy and Society 41 (1): 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2011.637335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhodes, Tim, and Kari Lancaster. 2020. ‘Mathematical Models As Public Troubles in COVID-19 Infection Control: Following the Numbers’. Health Sociology Review, May, 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/14461242.2020.1764376.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosen, R. 1991. Life Itself: A Comprehensive Inquiry into the Nature, Origin, and Fabrication of Life. In Complexity in Ecological Systems Series. New York, USA: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Salais, Robert. 2022. ‘“La Donnée n’est Pas Un Donné”: Statistics, Quantification and Democratic Choice’. In The New Politics of Numbers: Utopia, Evidence and Democracy, edited by Andrea Mennicken and Rober Salais, 379–415. London, United Kingdom: Utopia, Evidence and Democracy. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea. 2020. ‘Ethics of Quantification or Quantification of Ethics?’ Futures 116 (102509). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2019.102509.
   Google Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea, Gabriele Bammer, Isabelle Bruno, Erica Charters, Monica Di Fiore, Emmanuel Didier, Wendy Nelson Espeland, et al. 2020a. ‘Five Ways to Ensure That Models Serve Society: A Manifesto’. Nature 582:482–484. 7813 https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01812-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea, Gabriele Bammer, Isabelle Bruno, Erica Charters, Monica Di Fiore, Emmanuel Didier, Wendy Nelson Espeland, et al. 2020b. ‘Five Ways to Make Models Serve Society: A Manifesto - Supplementary Online Material’. Nature 482–484. 582 7813 https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01812-9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea, L. Benini, S. Funtowicz, M. Giampietro, M. Kaiser, E. Reinert, and P. van der Sluijs. Jeroen 2020. ‘The Technique Is Never Neutral. How Methodological Choices Condition the Generation of Narratives for Sustainability’. Environmental Science & Policy 106:87–98.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.01.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea, and Monica Di Fiore, eds. 2023. The Politics of Modelling. Numbers Between Science and Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea, and Silvio Funtowicz. 2017. “What Is Science’s Crisis Really About?” Futures 91:5–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2017.05.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea, Ângela Guimaraes Pereira, Jeroen P. van der Sluijs, and Silvio Funtowicz. 2013. ‘What Do I Make of Your Latinorum” Sensitivity Auditing of Mathematical Modelling’. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy 9 (2/3/4): 213–234. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJFIP.2013.058610.
   Google Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea, Marta Kuc-Czarnecka, Samuele Lo Piano, János Máté Lőrincz, Magdalena Olczyk, Arnald Puy, Erik Reinert, Stefán Thor Smith, and Jeroen P. van der Sluijs. 2023. ‘Impact Assessment Culture in the European Union. Time for Something New?’ Environmental Science & Policy 142 (April): 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.02.005.
   Google Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea, and Arnald Puy. 2022. ‘What Can Mathematical Modelling Contribute to a Sociology of Quantification?’ SSRN Scholarly Paper. Rochester, NY. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4212453.
   Google Scholar
• Saltelli, Andrea, Joachim P. Sturmberg, Daniel Sarewitz, and John P. A. Ioannidis. 2023. “What Did COVID-19 Really Teach Us About Science, Evidence and Society?” Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 29 (8): 1237–1239. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.13876.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuel, Boris. 2022. ‘The Shifting Legitimacies of Price Measurements:Official Statistics and the Quantification of Pwofitasyon in the 2009 Social Struggle in Guadeloupe’. In The New Politics of Numbers: Utopia, Evidence and Democracy, Andrea Mennicken and Robert Salais, 337–377. London, United Kingdom: Executive Policy and Governance. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Santner, Thomas J., Brian J. Williams, and William I. Notz. 2003. The Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments. New York, USA: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, Gideon. 1978. ‘Estimating the Dimension of a Model’. Annals of Statistics 6 (2): 461–464. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, Amartya. 1990. ‘Justice: Means versus Freedoms’. Philosophy & Public Affairs 19 (2): 111–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanford, Kyle. 2023. ‘Underdetermination of Scientific Theory’. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2023/entries/scientific-underdetermination/.
   Google Scholar
• Stark, Philip B., and Andrea Saltelli. 2018. “Cargo-Cult Statistics and Scientific Crisis.” Significance 15 (4): 40–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-9713.2018.01174.x.
   Google Scholar
• Stirling, Andy. 2023a. “Against Misleading Technocratic Precision in Research Evaluation and Wider Policy – a Response to Franzoni and Stephan (2023), ‘Uncertainty and Risk-Taking in Science’”. Research Policy 52 (3): 104709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104709.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling, Andy. 2023b. ‘Mind the Unknown: Exploring the Politics of Ignorance in Mathematical Models’. In The Politics of Modelling. Numbers Between Science and Policy, edited by Andrea Saltelli, 99–118. Oxford, United Kingdom: and Monica Di Fiore. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stothoff, Stuart A., and Gary R. Walter. 2013. “Average Infiltration at Yucca Mountain Over the Next Million Years.” Water Resources Research 49 (11): 7528–7545. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Supiot, Alain. 2017. Governance by Numbers: The Making of a Legal Model of Allegiance. Oxford, United Kingdom: Hart Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Szenberg, Michael. 1992. Eminent Economists: Their Life Philosophies. Cambridge University Press. http://admin.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/economics/history-economic-thought-and-methodology/eminent-economists-their-life-philosophies#dkQwZVJ4RazyzwHC.97.
   Google Scholar
• Teachout, Zephyr. 2022. ‘The Boss Will See You Now | Zephyr Teachout’. New York Review of Books, 2022. https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2022/08/18/the-boss-will-see-you-now-zephyr-teachout/.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, Monica G., and Robert H. Gardner. 2015. ‘Introduction to Models’. In Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice, 63–95. New York, NY: Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2794-4_3.
   Google Scholar
• van Beek, Lisette, Jeroen Oomen, Maarten Hajer, Peter Pelzer, and Detlef van Vuuren. 2022. ‘Navigating the Political: An Analysis of Political Calibration of Integrated Assessment Modelling in Light of the 1.5 °C Goal’. Environmental Science & Policy 133 (July): 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.03.024.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberg, A. M. 1972. “Science and Trans-Science.” Minerva 10 (2): 209–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01682418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winner, Langdon. 1989. The Whale and the Reactor : A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology. Chicago, Illinois, USA: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zuboff, Shoshana. 2019. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism : The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York, USA: PublicAffairs.
   Google Scholar