Search

Resolving the “replication crisis” is a top priority of the scientific community now. Numerous proposals have been made; still, there lacks not only an established solution but even an agreement on whether there exists a “crisis” or not. Here, by questioning the philosophical foundations of our study designs and analyses, I trace back the “crisis” to reductionist ontologies and methodologies ingrained in the modern statistical methods which have dominated biological, medical, psychological, and social sciences for a century. The crisis is not our inability to “reproduce” results but that, uncritical of our statistical methods and the experimental designs they have inculcated, we expect to be able to “reproduce” results despite neglecting almost all individual-level and contextual variables of complex processes.

Scientists' ability to integrate diverse forms of evidence and evaluate how well they can explain and predict phenomena, in other words, $\textit{to know how much they know}$, struggles to keep pace with technological innovation. Central to the challenge of extracting knowledge from data is the need to develop a metric of knowledge itself. A candidate metric of knowledge, $K$, was recently proposed by the author. This essay further advances and integrates that proposal, by developing a methodology to measure its key variable, symbolized with the Greek letter $\tau$ ("tau"). It will be shown how a $\tau$ can represent the description of any phenomenon, any theory to explain it, and any methodology to study it, allowing the knowledge about that phenomenon to be measured with $K$.To illustrate potential applications, the essay calculates $\tau$ and $K$ values of: logical syllogisms and proofs, mathematical calculations, empirical quantitative knowledge, statistical model selection problems, including how to correct for "forking paths" and "P-hacking" biases, randomised controlled experiments, reproducibility and replicability, qualitative analyses via process tracing, and mixed quantitative and qualitative evidence.Whilst preliminary in many respects, these results suggest that $K$ theory offers a meaningful understanding of knowledge, which makes testable metascientific predictions, and which may be used to analyse and integrate qualitative and quantitative evidence to tackle complex problems.

This paper provides the state of the art of data science in economics. Through a novel taxonomy of applications and methods advances in data science are investigated. The data science advances are investigated in three individual classes of deep learning models, ensemble models, and hybrid models. Application domains include stock market, marketing, E-commerce, corporate banking, and cryptocurrency. Prisma method, a systematic literature review methodology is used to ensure the quality of the survey. The findings revealed that the trends are on advancement of hybrid models as more than 51% of the reviewed articles applied hybrid model. On the other hand, it is found that based on the RMSE accuracy metric, hybrid models had higher prediction accuracy than other algorithms. While it is expected the trends go toward the advancements of deep learning models.