Vol.3 No.2 2010

73/86

Report : Knowledge for interdisciplinary consilience−176−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.3 No.2 (2010) For evaluation, what should be assessed in “synthesiology” and integration science? The integration science is to create new principles and concepts for integration, to pursue universality based on those principles, and to systematize. In “synthesiology”, consistency and rationality are important. Consistency is to bind the separate items into one, and it is also to establish a single scenario, and these are different from the logical consistency. Perhaps “rationality” should be called “adequacy”. In Dr. Kishimoto’s example, the methodology can be used in other places, not only for solving the risk comparison. It will become universal by systematization and generalization. When it is possible to define “consistency in this sense” as a new evaluation standard, I think evaluation is possible. Whichever it is, it will be based on a scenario.Another point is, since our subjects are large-scale, complex social issues, we must question “whether it is innovative, or progressive, and whether there are effects on others” in our evaluation. To prevent systematization and universalization from anchoring the subject in that field, it is important to accurately evaluate the progressiveness and effect on others.The transformative research, for which support is considered by NSF, is an attempt to transform science through revolutionary developments. In the United States, unexpected developments, effect on multiple fields, and creation of new research disciplines are expected. The European-type fusion is where a team is created to conduct the fusion research to arrive at an innovation, and is an attempt to gain something through fusion.In Japan, the fusion research is not necessarily going well. The reason is because, when an area of concentration is determined, the research activities go straight to the center, the objective will be solving the problem and whether one gets a result or not. It is even doubtful whether the fusion research is really being conducted.In such situations, I think I would like to see a proper academic approach to the social issues through “synthesiology” and integration science, and that may produce progress and effect on others.[ISM and synthetic research]Yoshiyasu Tamura (ISM)Because of the term “statistical data analysis”, many people may think statistics is analysis, but it is in fact the opposite, and I feel there are many “synthesiological” factors. In the past, a research on cement was conducted by Dr. Akaike at ISM. To operate the cement kiln stably, no conventional method worked, so a new statistical control method was considered, and this turned out to be successful.I’ll talk about studies done by graduate students. The first research by a student who got his doctorate in March was a study on “where the respiratory center was located in the rat brain”. He really loved mathematics and wrote all these mathematical models, and was scolded by the physician. Why was he scolded? Because he neglected physiology. The physician pointed out, “That kind of research is no good”, but the graduate student was so shocked he quit the research. Another graduate student had been working at a control system company, and was a very experienced 60 years old. His data was dyed slices of the brain that he looked through a microscope, but he grasped the heart of the research. While using mathematical techniques and statistics, he was able to match the physiology and the model because he had hands-on experience in problem solving and did not get entangled in virtual mathematics. The student who failed with the rat brain went on to analyze the shape of the rat jawbone. The quantification of shape could not be done with existing techniques. So, he used the data from the Institute of Genetics, and now seems to be successful.It is often said that “fusion research was never successful”, but the fusion research between the National Institute of Genetics (NIG) and ISM is going fairly well. That is because genetics and statistics share the same roots, and the geneticists and statisticians seem to get along very well.At ISM, there are many students who come from the financing world, and their objective is “how to prevent the company from suffering losses”. They think about what scenarios to write and how to gain most profit by using quite difficult differential equations for probability. Various elemental technologies are combined. Since the scenario model for what to select to get the best is the most important point in statistics, I think statistics has always blended well with the “synthesiological” way of thinking. What we call analysis is the analyzing done at the final level, but “what kind of analysis should be done” must be carefully integrated and synthesized.Right now, the people of statistics and information science like to use the word “data-driven”, and they say the fourth science is the “science of data”. Modeling of data may sound strange, but what is most important is how to model the system that generates the data, and I think it mixes well with synthetic research.[Categorization of synthetic method]Naoto Kobayashi (Waseda University)Since my specialty is physics, I tend to think analytically even when talking about synthesis. Therefore, I shall look at the synthesis method in an analytical manner. This figure was presented when I had a discussion with Prof. Richard Lester of MIT in Synthesiology Volume

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です