Deep controversy of the day

[timelets]

in order to understand what a simulation is, one also needs to clarify explicitly and precisely what a model is. This clarification is currently one of the most controversial issues in the philosophy of science, and it is far from clear how one may best deal with it. - The Philosophy of Information. Floridini, L. 2012.

---

One of the most perplexing questions in connection with models is how they relate to theories. The separation between models and theory is a very hazy one and in the jargon of many scientists it is often difficult, if not impossible, to draw a line.
...
There are no fixed rules or recipes for model building and so the very activity of figuring out what fits together and how affords an opportunity to learn about the model. Once the model is built, we do not learn about its properties by looking at it; we have to use and manipulate the model in order to elicit its secrets.
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

I've always thought that a model is one of many "aboutness" representations of the real thing, e.g. "map is not the territory." It appears though, that the issue is far from being settled.
Floridini bypasses the entire issue by introducing the concept of Level of Abstraction (LoA). In his view the real thing and its map are realizations at different LoAs.