The Proportionate Trading Model: Real Science or Junk Science

Murray, Brian P.

Journal: Cleveland State Law Review

Volume: 52

First Page: 391

Year: 2004

Bluebook Citation: 52 CLEV. ST. L. REV. 391 (2004)

Author: Brian Philip Murray: all 5 publications


Abstract

The PTM has all the hallmarks of "real" science, using either a scientists' definition or that of the Daubert Court. From a scientist's perspective, it is a functional paradigm, serving as a working model. The practitioners in the field are engaged in "clean-up," for example, deciding which acceleration factor best fits observed data. Under the Daubert test, the PTM will assist the trier of fact, has been subjected to peer review (unlike the major critique), and has acceptable rates of error and general acceptance.

Testifying experts may disagree as to which acceleration factor to use, but that is merely fair ground for impeachment and crossexamination. The testimony should be admitted and left to the jury to decide.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.