|Abstract||Scientific and statistical inferences build heavily on explicit, parametric models, and often with good reasons. However, the limited scope of parametric models and the increasing complexity of the studied systems in modern science raise the risk of model misspecification. Therefore, I examine alternative, data-based inference techniques, such as bootstrap resampling. I argue that their neglect in the philosophical literature is unjustified: they suit some contexts of inquiry much better and use a more direct approach to scientific inference. Moreover, they make more parsimonious assumptions and often replace theoretical understanding and knowledge about mechanisms by careful experimental design. Thus, it is worthwhile to study in detail how nonparametric models serve as inferential engines in science.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
S. Ducheyne (2008). Towards an Ontology of Scientific Models. Metaphysica 9 (1):119-127.
Alisa Bokulich (forthcoming). How Scientific Models Can Explain. Synthese:1--13.
David Danks (2005). Scientific Coherence and the Fusion of Experimental Results. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (4):791-807.
Susan G. Sterrett (2002). Physical Models and Fundamental Laws: Using One Piece of the World to Tell About Another. Mind and Society 3 (1):51-66.
Stephan Hartmann & Roman Frigg (2006). Models in Science. In Ed Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford.
Chuanfei Chin (2011). Models as Interpreters (with a Case Study From Pain Science). Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42 (2):303-312.
Norbert Victor (1980). Medical Diagnostics with Nonparametric Allocation Rules. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 1 (1):85-94.
Added to index2009-05-18
Total downloads8 ( #123,092 of 549,084 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,084 )
How can I increase my downloads?