A Guide to Comparisons of Star Formation Simulations with Observations
  We review an approach to observation-theory comparisons we call
"Taste-Testing." In this approach, synthetic observations are made of numerical
simulations, and then both real and synthetic observations are "tasted"
(compared) using a variety of statistical tests. We first lay out arguments for
bringing theory to observational space rather than observations to theory
space. Next, we explain that generating synthetic observations is only a step
along the way to the quantitative, statistical, taste tests that offer the most
insight. We offer a set of examples focused on polarimetry, scattering and
emission by dust, and spectral-line mapping in starforming regions. We conclude
with a discussion of the connection between statistical tests used to date and
the physics we seek to understand. In particular, we suggest that the
"lognormal" nature of molecular clouds can be created by the interaction of
many random processes, as can the lognormal nature of the IMF, so that the fact
that both the "Clump Mass Function" (CMF) and IMF appear lognormal does not
necessarily imply a direct relationship between them.
