Abductive reasoning

About: Abductive reasoning is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1917 publications have been published within this topic receiving 44645 citations. The topic is also known as: abduction & abductive inference.

Abduction and Creative Inferences in Science

Abstract: CogSci2004 Symposium Abduction and Creative Inferences in Science Lorenzo Magnani (lorenzo.magnani@unipv.it) - Organizer, University of Pavia, Italy Atocha Aliseda (atocha@filosoficas.unam.mx), UNAM. Mexico City, Mexico Thomas Addis (tom.addis@port.ac.uk) and David Gooding (hssdcg@bath.ac.uk), University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK and University of Bath, Bath, UK John Woods (jhwoods@interchange.ubc.ca) and Dov Gabbay (dg@dcs.kcl.ac.uk), University of British Columbia, CA and King’s College London, UK Joke Meheus (joke.meheus@rug.ac.be), Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium Matti Sintonen and Sami Paavola (matti.sintonen@helsinki.fi,sami.paavola@helsinki.fi, - Discussants, University of Helsinki, Finland The symposium aims to explore abduction (inference to explanatory hypotheses), an important but neglected topic in scientific reasoning. The aim is to integrate philosophi- cal, cognitive, and computational issues. The main thesis is that abduction is a significant kind of scientific reasoning, helpful in delineating the first principles of a new theory of science. The status of abduction is very controversial. When dealing with abductive reasoning misinterpretations and equivocations are common. What are the differences between abduction and induction? What are the differ- ences between abduction and the well-known hypothetico- deductive method? What did Peirce mean when he consid- ered abduction a kind of inference? Does abduction in- volve only the generation of hypotheses or their evaluation too? Are the criteria for the best explanation in abductive reasoning epistemic, or pragmatic, or both? How many kinds of abduction are there? The symposium aims to in- crease knowledge about creative and expert inferences. The study of these high-level methods of abductive rea- soning is situated at the crossroads of philosophy, episte- mology, artificial intelligence, cognitive psychology, and logic; that is at the heart of cognitive science. More than a hundred years ago, the great American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce coined the term “ab- duction” to refer to inference that involves the generation and evaluation of explanatory hypotheses. The study of abductive inference was slow to develop, as logicians con- centrated on deductive logic and on inductive logic based on formal calculi such as probability theory. In recent dec- ades, however, there has been renewed interest in abduc- tive inference from two primary sources. Philosophers of science have recognized the importance of abduction in the discovery and evaluation of scientific theories, and researchers in artificial intelligence have realized that ab- duction is a key part of medical diagnosis and other tasks that require finding explanations. Psychologists have been slow to adopt the terms “abduction” and “abductive infer- ence” but have been showing increasing interest in causal and explanatory reasoning. Thus abduction is now a key topic of research in phi- losophy of science. First, this symposium ties together the concerns of philosophers of science and logicians, show- ing, for example, the connections between formal models and abduction (Meheus, Woods and Gabbay). Second, it lays out a useful general framework for discussion of vari- ous kinds of abduction (Magnani), such as model-based and manipulative abductions. Third, it develops important ideas about aspects of abductive reasoning that have been relatively neglected in philosophy of science, including the role of testing in abductive inference (Aliseda), and the interrogative model of inquiry and the role of different kinds of why-questions and strategic principles employed in attempts to find and construct answers also at the com- putational level (Sintonen and Paavola, Addis and Good- ing). The clarification of these topics aims to increase knowledge about some aspects of explanatory reasoning and hypothesis formation very relevant in many epistemic tasks. 1. If we stress the concept of model-based and manipu- lative abduction (Magnani), creative inferences in science can be seen as formed by the application of heuristic (strate- gic) procedures that involve all kinds of good and bad infer- ential actions and both internal and external representations, and not only the mechanical application of rules. 2. Recent logical models can illustrate in a rigorous way how these (strategic) abductive steps are combined with deductive steps (Meheus, Woods and Gabbay). 3. Common to all abduction problems is a cognitive tar- get that cannot be hit on the basis of what the abducer presently knows. Abductive hypotheses do not enhance a reasoner’s knowledge. Abduction, accordingly, is igno- rance-preserving inference. These abductive processes are dynamical (Woods and Gabbay). 4. The “abductive steps” are also analyzable in terms of responses to surprising singular or general facts, showing a connection to explanation-seeking why-questions (Sinto- nen and Paavola). 5. The importance of experimental verification for hy- potheses evaluation in science is stressed by the relation- ship between abduction and pragmatism in Peirce (Al- iseda). 6. Abduction cannot be thought of in isolation from the two other type of inference (deduction and induc- tion/validation) identified by Peirce. Computer models of scientific behaviour and music conversation suggest that in simulation of abduction requires the use of mixed strate- gies using random actions as suggested by game theory (Addis and Gooding).

Automated Scientific Assistant for Cancer and Chemoprevention

Abstract: Logical modeling of cell biological phenomena has the potential to facilitate both the understanding of the mechanisms that underly the phenomena as well as the process of experimentation undertaken by the biologist. Starting from the general hypotheses that Scientific Modeling is inextricably linked to abductive reasoning, we aim to develop a general logical model of cell signalling and to provide an automated scientific assistant for the biologists to help them in thinking about their experimental results and the possible further investigation of the phenomena of interest. We present a first such system, called ApoCelSys, that provides an automated analysis of experimental results and support to a biology laboratory that is studying Cancer and Chemoprevention.

Context based inferences in research methodology: the role of culture in justifying knowledge claims

Abstract: Drawing on work in epistemology and the philosophy of science, this paper seeks to provide very general reasons for why a comparative perspective needs to be applied to the inferential procedures of research methodologies where these concern the issue of justifying knowledge claims. In particular, the paper explores the role of culture on a number of important patterns of reasoning that figure in inferential arguments in research methodologies. The patterns examined are induction, both enumerative and analytical, hypothetico-deductive reasoning, and abductive inference. In each case it is argued that substantive theories about the world, including cultures, significantly affect inferential procedures. Examples chosen to illustrate this in more detail mostly reflect the impact of Confucian heritage cultures on inference.

Abductive Reasoning with Filtered Circumscription

Abstract: For logical artificial intelligence to be truly useful,its methods must scale to problems of realistic size.An interruptible algorithm enables a logical agentto act in a timely manner to the best o ...