Another problem with RBN models of mechanisms

IF 0.8 4区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Alexander Gebharter
{"title":"Another problem with RBN models of mechanisms","authors":"Alexander Gebharter","doi":"10.1387/THEORIA.14502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Casini, Illari, Russo, and Williamson (2011) suggest to model mechanisms by means of recursive Bayesian networks (RBNs) and Clarke, Leuridan, and Williamson (2014) extend their modelling approach to mechanisms featuring causal feedback. One of the main selling points of the RBN approach should be that it provides answers to questions concerning manipulation and control. In this paper I demonstrate that the method to compute the effects of interventions the authors mentioned endorse leads to absurd results under the additional assumption of faithfulness, which can be expected to hold in most RBN models of mechanisms.","PeriodicalId":45699,"journal":{"name":"THEORIA-REVISTA DE TEORIA HISTORIA Y FUNDAMENTOS DE LA CIENCIA","volume":"13 1","pages":"177-188"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THEORIA-REVISTA DE TEORIA HISTORIA Y FUNDAMENTOS DE LA CIENCIA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1387/THEORIA.14502","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Casini, Illari, Russo, and Williamson (2011) suggest to model mechanisms by means of recursive Bayesian networks (RBNs) and Clarke, Leuridan, and Williamson (2014) extend their modelling approach to mechanisms featuring causal feedback. One of the main selling points of the RBN approach should be that it provides answers to questions concerning manipulation and control. In this paper I demonstrate that the method to compute the effects of interventions the authors mentioned endorse leads to absurd results under the additional assumption of faithfulness, which can be expected to hold in most RBN models of mechanisms.
RBN机制模型的另一个问题
Casini、Illari、Russo和Williamson(2011)建议通过递归贝叶斯网络(rbn)对机制进行建模,Clarke、Leuridan和Williamson(2014)将他们的建模方法扩展到具有因果反馈的机制。RBN方法的主要卖点之一应该是它提供了有关操纵和控制的问题的答案。在本文中,我证明了计算作者提到的认可的干预措施效果的方法在额外的忠诚假设下导致荒谬的结果,这可以预期在大多数机制的RBN模型中成立。
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
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
13
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊介绍: THEORIA is open to original and relevant papers from any of the fields covered by the journal, i.e. logic and philosophy of logic, history and philosophy of mathematics, history and philosophy of science, philosophy of technology, philosophy of language and philosophy of mind and cognition. Articles in English and Spanish are preferred, but the journal also accepts articles written in any of the languages of the Iberian Peninsula.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信