is it more than a commentary on overfitting to the tune of "with enough epicycles you can make the elephant wiggle its trunk"?
is it more than a commentary on overfitting to the tune of "with enough epicycles you can make the elephant wiggle its trunk"?
If you are referring to Hagerty+Srinivasan:
They certainly didn't think that a better fit => "truer".
They used the term "truer" to describe a model that more accurately captures the underlying causal structure or "true" relationship between variables in a population.
As for the paper I linked, I still haven't read it closely enough to confirm that D-Machine's comment below is a good dismissal.
I'm inclined to think it's more like "interpolating vs extrapolating"