Feedback Loops: Reinforcing vs Balancing Explained

What has been corrected on this page?

Every accepted correction to this page is recorded with the exact change, so readers can see how the page improved over time.

1. 28 July 2026 · corrected by Emir Baycan

   Qualified two claims: noted that the traditional Kaibab Plateau deer-population figures (4,000 to 100,000) are the textbook numbers but that later ecological research has questioned their precision and argued drought and range degradation also contributed, not predator removal alone; and softened 'Therac-25 directly shaped IEC 62304' to note it became a widely cited cautionary example that later informed software-safety standards, since a precise direct causal line to a specific standard is hard to establish. The Portfolio insurance/Brady Commission attribution, Wendy Wood's willpower research, and Sterman's 1989 beer-game study (48 trials, 210 participants, universal oscillation) were verified accurate and left in place.

   What the page claimed

   The article presented the Kaibab deer collapse as a settled predator-removal case with precise population figures, and said Therac-25 directly shaped IEC 62304.

   What was corrected

   Added the ecological debate over the Kaibab figures and softened the Therac-25/IEC 62304 causal claim to an informational influence rather than direct shaping.

   Why: The Kaibab case is more contested in later ecology literature than the textbook telling suggests, and the Therac-25/standard link is influence rather than direct causation. Corrections add nuance rather than adding new sources.

   View the full record →

Who checked this page?

1 contributor has checked "Feedback Loops: Reinforcing vs Balancing Explained" on When Notes Fly. Each name below links to that person's public CitePep profile, where every contribution they have made is listed with the exact change they proposed.