Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-15T13:39:56.158Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Confirmation and Chaos

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Maralee Harrell  and
Clark Glymour
Maralee Harrell
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Colorado College
Clark Glymour
Affiliation:
Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, University of West Florida and Department of Philosophy, Carnegie Mellon University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recently, Rueger and Sharp (1996) and Koperski (1998) have been concerned to show that certain procedural accounts of model confirmation are compromised by non-linear dynamics. We suggest that the issues raised are better approached by considering whether chaotic data analysis methods allow for reliable inference from data. We provide a framework and an example of this approach.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 69 , Issue 2 , June 2002 , pp. 256 - 265
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Send requests for reprints to: Maralee Harrell, Department of Philosophy, Colorado College, 14 E. Cache La Poudre St., Colorado Springs, CO, 80903; mharrell@coloradocollege.edu.

‡

We gratefully acknowledge our indebtedness to Kevin Kelly and David Danks. We would also like to thank an anonymous reviewer for very detailed and helpful comments.

References

Abarbanel, Henry D.I. (1996), Analysis of Observed Chaotic Data. New York: Springer Verlag.10.1007/978-1-4612-0763-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broomhead, D.S., and King, Gregory P. (1986), “Extracting Qualitative Dynamics from Experimental Data”, Extracting Qualitative Dynamics from Experimental Data 20:217–236.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy (1983), How the Laws of Physics Lie. New York: Clarendon Press.10.1093/0198247044.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Andrew M. (1989), “Reconstructing Attractors from Scalar Time Series: A Comparison of Singular System and Redundancy Criteria”, Reconstructing Attractors from Scalar Time Series: A Comparison of Singular System and Redundancy Criteria 34:391–404.Google Scholar
Glymour, Clark (1994), “On the Methods of Cognitive Neuropsychology”, On the Methods of Cognitive Neuropsychology 45:815–835.Google Scholar
Glymour, Clark (1980), Theory and Evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Grassberger, P., and Procaccia, I. (1983), “Characterization of Strange Attractors”, Characterization of Strange Attractors 50:346–349.Google Scholar
Harrell, Maralee (2000), Chaos and Reliable Knowledge. PhD. Dissertation. San Diego, CA: University of California.Google Scholar
Kaplan, Daniel T., and Glass, Leon (1992), “Direct Test for Determinism in a Time Series”, Direct Test for Determinism in a Time Series 68:427–430.Google Scholar
Kelly, Kevin T. (1996), The Logic of Reliable Inquiry. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Koperski, Jeffrey (1998), “Models, Confirmation and Chaos”, Models, Confirmation and Chaos 65:624–648.Google Scholar
Laymon, Ronald (1985), “Idealizations and the Testing of Theories by Experimentation”, in Achinstein, P. and Hannaway, O. (eds.), Observation, Experimentation and Hypothesis in Modern Physical Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 147–173.Google Scholar
Laymon, Ronald (1989), “Cartwright and the Lying Laws of Physics”, Cartwright and the Lying Laws of Physics 86:353–372.Google Scholar
Mayo, Deborah G. (1996), Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226511993.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osherson, Daniel N., Stob, Michael, and Weinstein, Scott (1986), Systems That Learn: An Introduction to Learning Theory for Cognitive and Computer Scientists. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ott, Edward (1993), Chaos in Dynamical Systems. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Packard, N.H., Crutchfield, J.P., Farmer, J.D., and Shaw, R.S. (1980), “Geometry From a Time Series”, Geometry From a Time Series 45:712–716.Google Scholar
Redhead, Michael (1980), “Models in Physics”, Models in Physics 31:154–163.Google Scholar
Rueger, Alexander, and Sharp, W. David (1996), “Simple Theories of a Messy World: Truth and Explanatory Power in Nonlinear Dynamics”, Simple Theories of a Messy World: Truth and Explanatory Power in Nonlinear Dynamics 47:93–112.Google Scholar
Sauer Tim, James A. Yorke, and Casdagli, Martin (1991), “Embedology”, Embedology 65:579–616.Google Scholar
Schulte, Oliver (2000), “Inferring Conservation Laws in Particle Physics: A Case study in the Problem of Induction”, Inferring Conservation Laws in Particle Physics: A Case study in the Problem of Induction 51:771–806.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, William C. (1987), “False Models as Means to Truer Theories”, in Nitecki, M. and Hoffman, A. (eds.), Neural Models in Biology. New York: Oxford University Press, 3–55.Google Scholar