At first this question seems elementary -- Is "real" data on a graph (xy coordinates) a model? However here is my logic. We know a model is an abstract representation of the real-world. A graph is a model. A mathematical formula is a model. Most of the time the data output from these graphs, as we synonymously call a model, is "not real data" but it behaves similar. Yet when you plot "real-time" data, it seems it would disqualify as a model because the output is real data similar to a real system. So therefore it is the real system and not a representation.
1 Answer 1
It totally depends on where you're coming from regarding the word model, since this is such a general word used all over.
Here's my take on it:
We know a model is an abstract representation of the real-world.
It is but we ought to model with a purpose (a domain) in mind, and the model should help us work the domain and problems in the domain.
xy coordinates alone is probably not sufficient to be called a model, though one could make the case for it.
We would expect a model to have more capabilities, like finding the (as the crow files) distance between two items, or looking up the coordinates of a city, or navigating on city streets.
Without some interesting domain-specific behaviors, xy coordinates is more of a data structure or data type than a model.
Still, models come from data structures, so you might be thinking more behind the model than I can read in the question.
Yet when you plot "real-time" data, it seems it would disqualify as a model because the output is real data similar to a real system. So therefore it is the real system and not a representation.
I might argue that it is not a model because there is no inherent domain problem solving capability, so it is more information (data) than a model. If you were to combine the data with some capabilities to reason over the data, answer question pertinent to the domain, then I would see it as a model.
YMMV.