Can artificial intelligence generate scientific knowledge? Pre-theoretical knowledge without epistemic agency

IF 6.1 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Clemente García-Hidalgo
{"title":"Can artificial intelligence generate scientific knowledge? Pre-theoretical knowledge without epistemic agency","authors":"Clemente García-Hidalgo","doi":"10.1007/s00146-026-03154-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper examines whether artificial intelligence systems can generate genuine scientific knowledge. I argue that AI can produce scientific knowledge, but only in a pre-theoretical and non-agential sense. To make this thesis precise, I distinguish knowledge-as-a-product (truth-apt, methodologically warranted outputs) from knowledge-as-a-status (an epistemic standing attributable to responsible agents), and I introduce a tripartite distinction between the capacity for epistemic responsibility (categorical), the exercise of that capacity (graded), and the allocation of responsibility within scientific practice (graded). Current AI systems can contribute knowledge-as-a-product without being knowers or bearers of knowledge-as-a-status. Pre-theoretical knowledge, defined here equivalently as pre-explanatory-integration knowledge, requires truth-aptness, methodological warrant robust against ML-specific failure modes, and the absence of explanatory integration. Engaging with the theory-ladenness thesis (Hanson 1958; Pietsch 2015; Andrews 2025), with hermeneutic and pragmatist perspectives on scientific knowledge, and with recent positions in the philosophy of machine learning (Coeckelbergh 2025; Durán and Pozzi 2026), I clarify that \"pre-theoretical\" denotes the absence of explanatory integration within the output, not the absence of theoretical influence on the knowledge-production process. The framework is tested against a sustained case study of AI-supported mammography screening. The analysis clarifies who bears responsibility for AI-assisted results, credits AI contributions without implying authorship, and suggests governance criteria for promoting AI outputs to full scientific knowledge.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47165,"journal":{"name":"AI & Society","volume":"41 9","pages":"8509 - 8524"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AI & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-026-03154-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper examines whether artificial intelligence systems can generate genuine scientific knowledge. I argue that AI can produce scientific knowledge, but only in a pre-theoretical and non-agential sense. To make this thesis precise, I distinguish knowledge-as-a-product (truth-apt, methodologically warranted outputs) from knowledge-as-a-status (an epistemic standing attributable to responsible agents), and I introduce a tripartite distinction between the capacity for epistemic responsibility (categorical), the exercise of that capacity (graded), and the allocation of responsibility within scientific practice (graded). Current AI systems can contribute knowledge-as-a-product without being knowers or bearers of knowledge-as-a-status. Pre-theoretical knowledge, defined here equivalently as pre-explanatory-integration knowledge, requires truth-aptness, methodological warrant robust against ML-specific failure modes, and the absence of explanatory integration. Engaging with the theory-ladenness thesis (Hanson 1958; Pietsch 2015; Andrews 2025), with hermeneutic and pragmatist perspectives on scientific knowledge, and with recent positions in the philosophy of machine learning (Coeckelbergh 2025; Durán and Pozzi 2026), I clarify that "pre-theoretical" denotes the absence of explanatory integration within the output, not the absence of theoretical influence on the knowledge-production process. The framework is tested against a sustained case study of AI-supported mammography screening. The analysis clarifies who bears responsibility for AI-assisted results, credits AI contributions without implying authorship, and suggests governance criteria for promoting AI outputs to full scientific knowledge.

人工智能能产生科学知识吗?没有认知代理的前理论知识
本文探讨人工智能系统是否能产生真正的科学知识。我认为人工智能可以产生科学知识,但只能在前理论和非代理意义上。为了使这篇论文更准确,我将知识作为一种产品(倾向于真理,在方法上得到保证的输出)与知识作为一种状态(归因于负责的主体的认知地位)区分开来,并介绍了认知责任能力(分类)、这种能力的行使(分级)和科学实践中的责任分配(分级)之间的三方区别。目前的人工智能系统可以提供作为产品的知识,而不是作为知识地位的知晓者或承载者。预理论知识,在这里等价地定义为预解释整合知识,需要真理的适应性,方法保证对ml特定的失效模式的鲁棒性,以及缺乏解释整合。通过对理论充实的论文(Hanson 1958; Pietsch 2015; Andrews 2025),对科学知识的解释学和实用主义观点,以及最近在机器学习哲学中的立场(Coeckelbergh 2025; Durán and Pozzi 2026),我澄清了“前理论”是指产出中缺乏解释性整合,而不是缺乏对知识生产过程的理论影响。该框架通过人工智能支持的乳房x线摄影筛查的持续案例研究进行了测试。该分析明确了谁对人工智能辅助结果负责,在不暗示作者身份的情况下赞扬人工智能贡献,并提出了将人工智能产出促进为完整的科学知识的治理标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
AI & Society
AI & Society COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
257
期刊介绍: AI & Society: Knowledge, Culture and Communication, is an International Journal publishing refereed scholarly articles, position papers, debates, short communications, and reviews of books and other publications. Established in 1987, the Journal focuses on societal issues including the design, use, management, and policy of information, communications and new media technologies, with a particular emphasis on cultural, social, cognitive, economic, ethical, and philosophical implications. AI & Society has a broad scope and is strongly interdisciplinary. We welcome contributions and participation from researchers and practitioners in a variety of fields including information technologies, humanities, social sciences, arts and sciences. This includes broader societal and cultural impacts, for example on governance, security, sustainability, identity, inclusion, working life, corporate and community welfare, and well-being of people. Co-authored articles from diverse disciplines are encouraged. AI & Society seeks to promote an understanding of the potential, transformative impacts and critical consequences of pervasive technology for societies. Technological innovations, including new sciences such as biotech, nanotech and neuroscience, offer a great potential for societies, but also pose existential risk. Rooted in the human-centred tradition of science and technology, the Journal acts as a catalyst, promoter and facilitator of engagement with diversity of voices and over-the-horizon issues of arts, science, technology and society. AI & Society expects that, in keeping with the ethos of the journal, submissions should provide a substantial and explicit argument on the societal dimension of research, particularly the benefits, impacts and implications for society. This may include factors such as trust, biases, privacy, reliability, responsibility, and competence of AI systems. Such arguments should be validated by critical comment on current research in this area. Curmudgeon Corner will retain its opinionated ethos. The journal is in three parts: a) full length scholarly articles; b) strategic ideas, critical reviews and reflections; c) Student Forum is for emerging researchers and new voices to communicate their ongoing research to the wider academic community, mentored by the Journal Advisory Board; Book Reviews and News; Curmudgeon Corner for the opinionated. Papers in the Original Section may include original papers, which are underpinned by theoretical, methodological, conceptual or philosophical foundations. The Open Forum Section may include strategic ideas, critical reviews and potential implications for society of current research. Network Research Section papers make substantial contributions to theoretical and methodological foundations within societal domains. These will be multi-authored papers that include a summary of the contribution of each author to the paper. Original, Open Forum and Network papers are peer reviewed. The Student Forum Section may include theoretical, methodological, and application orientations of ongoing research including case studies, as well as, contextual action research experiences. Papers in this section are normally single-authored and are also formally reviewed. Curmudgeon Corner is a short opinionated column on trends in technology, arts, science and society, commenting emphatically on issues of concern to the research community and wider society. Normal word length: Original and Network Articles 10k, Open Forum 8k, Student Forum 6k, Curmudgeon 1k. The exception to the co-author limit of Original and Open Forum (4), Network (10), Student (3) and Curmudgeon (2) articles will be considered for their special contributions. Please do not send your submissions by email but use the "Submit manuscript" button. NOTE TO AUTHORS: The Journal expects its authors to include, in their submissions: a) An acknowledgement of the pre-accept/pre-publication versions of their manuscripts on non-commercial and academic sites. b) Images: obtain permissions from the copyright holder/original sources. c) Formal permission from their ethics committees when conducting studies with people.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书