Skip to main content

Is Plausible Reasoning a Sensible Alternative for Inductive-Statistical Reasoning?

  • Conference paper
Book cover Advances in Artificial Intelligence – SBIA 2004 (SBIA 2004)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 3171))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The general purpose of this paper is to show a practical instance of how philosophy can benefit from some ideas, methods and techniques developed in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI). It has to do with some recent claims [4] that some of the most traditional philosophical problems have been raised and, in some sense, solved by AI researchers. The philosophical problem we will deal with here is the representation of non-deductive intra-theoretic scientific inferences. We start by showing the flaws with the most traditional solution for this problem found in philosophy: Hempel’s Inductive-Statistical (I-S) model [5]. After we present a new formal model based on previous works motivated by reasoning needs in Artificial Intelligence [11] and show that since it does not suffer from the problems identified in the I-S model, it has great chances to be successful in the task of satisfactorily representing the non-deductive intra- theoretic scientific inferences.

This work is partially supported by CNPq through the LOCIA (Logic, Science and Artificial Intelligence) Project.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Buchsbaum, A., Pequeno, T., Pequeno, M.: The Logical Expression of Reasoning. In: Béziau, J., Krause, D. (eds.) New Threats in Foundations of Science. Papers Dedicated to the Eightieth Birthday of Patrick Suppes, Kluwer, Dordrecht (2004) (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Carnap, R.: Logical Foundations of Probability. U. of Chicago Press, Chicago (1950)

    Google Scholar 

  3. da Costa, N.C.A.: On the Theory of Inconsistent Formal Systems. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 15, 497–510 (1974)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Ford, M., Glymour, C., Hayes, P. (eds.): Android Epistemology. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hempel, C.G.: Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. Free Press, New York (1965)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hintikka, J.: A Two-Dimensional Continuum of Inductive Methods. In: Hintikka, J., Suppes, P. (eds.) Aspects of Inductive Logic, North Holland, Amsterdam (1966)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kemeny, J.: Fair Bets and Inductive Probabilities. Journal of Symbolic Logic 20, 263–273 (1955)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Kyburg, H.: Uncertain Logics. In: Gabbay, D., Hogge, D., Robinson, J. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming. Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning, vol. 3, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  9. McCarthy, J.: Applications of Circumscription to Formalizing Commonsense Knowledge. Artificial Intelligence 26, 89–116 (1986)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Moore, R.: Semantic Considerations on Nonmonotonic Logic. Artificial Intelligence 25, 75–94 (1985)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Pequeno, T., Buchsbaum, A.: The Logic of Epistemic Inconsistency. In: Allen, J., Fikes, R., Sandewall, E. (eds.) Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of Second International Conference, pp. 453–460. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pollock, J.L.: The Building of Oscar. Philosophical Perspectives 2, 315–344 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Reiter, R.: A Logic for Default Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13, 81–132 (1980)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Silvestre, R., Pequeno, T.: A Logical Treatment of Scientific Anomalies. In: Arabnia, H., Joshua, R., Mun, Y. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2003 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 669–675. CSRA Press, Las Vegas (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tan, Y.H.: Is Default Logic a Reinvention of I-S Reasoning? Synthese 110, 357–379 (1997)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Silvestre, R.S., Pequeno, T.H.C. (2004). Is Plausible Reasoning a Sensible Alternative for Inductive-Statistical Reasoning?. In: Bazzan, A.L.C., Labidi, S. (eds) Advances in Artificial Intelligence – SBIA 2004. SBIA 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3171. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-28645-5_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-28645-5_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-23237-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-28645-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics