View topic on PhilPapers for more information
Related categories

36 found
Order:
More results on PhilPapers
  1. added 2020-06-08
    ‘The Innocent V The Fickle Few’: How Jurors Understand Random-Match-Probabilities and Judges’ Directions When Reasoning About DNA and Refuting Evidence.Michelle B. Cowley-Cunningham - 2017 - Journal of Forensic Science and Criminal Investigation 3 (5):April/May 2017.
    DNA evidence is one of the most significant modern advances in the search for truth since the cross examination, but its format as a random-match-probability makes it difficult for people to assign an appropriate probative value (Koehler, 2001). While Frequentist theories propose that the presentation of the match as a frequency rather than a probability facilitates more accurate assessment (e.g., Slovic et al., 2000), Exemplar-Cueing Theory predicts that the subjective weight assigned may be affected by the frequency or probability format, (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. added 2020-06-08
    Lenses of Evidence – Jurors’ Evidential Reasoning. *Invited Talk –Experimental Psychology Oxford Seminar Series 2010.Michelle B. Cowley-Cunningham - 2010 - SSRN E-Library Legal Anthropology eJournal, Archives of Vols. 1-3, 2016-2018.
    This paper presents empirical findings from a set of reasoning and mock jury studies presented at the Experimental Psychology Oxford Seminar Series (2010) and the King's Bench Chambers KBW Barristers Seminar Series (2010). The presentation asks the following questions and presents empirical answers using the Lenses of Evidence Framework (Cowley & Colyer, 2010; see also van Koppen & Wagenaar, 1993): -/- Why is mental representation important for psychology? -/- Why is mental representation important for evidence law? -/- Lens 1: The (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. added 2020-04-15
    Support et tendances de la falsifiabilité.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Les partisans de Popper ont fait valoir que la plupart des critiques reposaient sur une incompréhension de ses idées. Ils affirment que Popper ne devrait pas être interprété dans le sens où la falsifiabilité est une condition suffisante pour la délimitation de la science. Après avoir abandonné le concept de falsifiabilité, la question de la méthode de démarcation entre science et pseudoscience a été : choisir la théorie la plus probable à des fins pédagogiques, la théorie la plus corroborée par (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. added 2020-04-02
    Channels’ Confirmation and Predictions’ Confirmation: From the Medical Test to the Raven Paradox.Chenguang Lu - 2020 - Entropy 22 (4):384.
    After long arguments between positivism and falsificationism, the verification of universal hypotheses was replaced with the confirmation of uncertain major premises. Unfortunately, Hemple proposed the Raven Paradox. Then, Carnap used the increment of logical probability as the confirmation measure. So far, many confirmation measures have been proposed. Measure F proposed by Kemeny and Oppenheim among them possesses symmetries and asymmetries proposed by Elles and Fitelson, monotonicity proposed by Greco et al., and normalizing property suggested by many researchers. Based on the (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. added 2020-03-23
    Critiques de la falsifiabilité de Karl Popper.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    La falsifiabilité de Popper a été critiquée à la fois pour avoir exclu la science légitime et pour avoir accordé un statut scientifique aux pseudo-sciences. Selon Larry Laudan, « cela a la conséquence fâcheuse de considérer comme « scientifique » toute demande faisant de fausses allégations de manière concluante ». Certains reprochent à Popper en disant que sa théorie ne constitue pas une alternative légitime aux propositions inductives qu’il critique. Jeffrey soutient que le bayésianisme, qui insiste sur le point de (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. added 2020-03-21
    Pseudoştiinţă? Dincolo de noi...Nicolae Sfetcu - 2015 - Drobeta Turnu Severin: MultiMedia Publishing.
    Întrebarea de bază este, ce este o pseudoştiinţă? Una din cele mai disputate delimitări ale ştiinţei. Mulţi savanţi de renume mondial, unanim recunoscuţi (ca de ex. Charles Darwin) au cochetat de-a lungul timpului cu diverse aspecte ale pseudoştiinţei considerându-le, cu bună credinţă, drept ştiinţă. Şi multe domenii ale pseudoştiinţei actuale au fost, la vremea lor, considerate drept domenii onorabile ale ştiinţei. Chiar şi în prezent, practicanţii pseudoştiinţelor nu recunosc valabilitatea etichetei puse domeniului lor de activitate. Oamenii de ştiinţă au tendinţa (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  7. added 2020-03-15
    La falsification méthodologique sophistiquée.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Imre Lakatos a proposé une modification du critère de Popper, qu'il a qualifié de « falsification sophistiquée (méthodologique) ». De ce point de vue, le critère de délimitation ne devrait pas s'appliquer à une hypothèse ou à une théorie isolée, mais plutôt à l'ensemble d'un programme de recherche. La falsification méthodologique sophistiquée change le problème du mode d’évaluation théorique en problème de l’évaluation des séries théoriques. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25555.73761.
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. added 2020-03-02
    Falsification et réfutation - Extension de la falsifiabilité de Popper.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Selon Popper, une théorie scientifique peut être légitimement sauvée de la falsification en introduisant une hypothèse auxiliaire permettant de générer de nouvelles prédictions falsifiables. De plus, s’il existe des soupçons de biais ou d’erreur, les chercheurs pourraient introduire une hypothèse auxiliaire falsifiable, qui permettrait de procéder à des tests. De nombreux autres auteurs ont proposé des critères pour démarquer la science de la pseudoscience. Celles-ci incluent généralement la croyance en l'autorité, des expériences irremplaçables, des exemples choisis, le manque de volonté (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. added 2020-02-01
    Susțineri ale falsificabilității lui Karl Popper.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Suporterii lui Popper au susținut că cele mai multe critici se bazează pe o interpretare neînțeleasă a ideilor sale. Ei afirmă că Popper nu ar trebui interpretat în sensul că falsificabilitatea este o condiție suficientă pentru delimitarea științei. Unele pasaje par să sugereze că el o consideră doar o condiție necesară. Alte pasaje ar sugera că, pentru ca o teorie să fie științifică, Popper impune (pe lângă falsificabilitate) și alte teste, și că rezultatele negative ale testelor sunt acceptate. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22639.79521.
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. added 2020-01-24
    El sentido lógico de la refutabilidad.Luis Felipe Bartolo Alegre - manuscript
    In this paper, I analyse some of the classical criticism to falsificationism in the light of the distinction between the logical and practical sense of falsification. In the first section, I briefly characterise the basics of the falsificationist proposal. The second section presents the criticism of the logical empiricists Reichenbach and Neurath, and the third presents the criticism of Thomas Kuhn. In the fourth section, I introduce the reforms to falsificationism proposed by Lakatos, which allows me to distinguish the logical (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. added 2020-01-12
    La Distinction Entre Falsification Et Rejet Dans le Problème de la Démarcation de Karl Popper.Nicolae Sfetcu - 2020 - Drobeta Turnu Severin: MultiMedia Publishing.
    Malgré les critiques de la théorie de Karl Popper sur la falsifiabilité pour la démarcation entre la science et la non-science, principalement la pseudo-science, ce critère est toujours très utile et parfaitement valide après avoir été perfectionné par Popper et ses disciples. De plus, même dans sa version originale, qualifiée de « dogmatique » par Lakatos, Popper n’a pas affirmé que cette méthode constituait un critère absolu de démarcation : un seul contre-exemple ne suffit pas à falsifier une théorie ; (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. added 2019-11-25
    Falsificare și respingere.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    O teorie științifică, conform lui Popper, poate fi salvată în mod legitim de falsificare prin introducerea unei ipoteze auxiliare care să permită generarea de predicții noi, falsificabile. De asemenea, dacă există suspiciuni de părtinire sau eroare, cercetătorii ar putea introduce o ipoteză falsificabilă auxiliară, care să permită testarea. Dar această tehnică nu poate rezolva problema în general, deoarece orice ipoteză auxiliară poate fi contestată în același mod, ad infinitum. Pentru a rezolva această regresiune, Popper introduce ideea unei declarații de bază, (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. added 2019-11-21
    Falsificabilitatea (Karl Popper).Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Karl Popper a propus falsificabilitatea ca un criteriu important în diferențierea dintre știință și pseudoștiință. El susține că verificarea și confirmarea nu pot juca niciun rol în formularea unui criteriu satisfăcător de delimitare. În schimb, propune ca teoriile științifice să se deosebească de teoriile ne-științifice prin pretenții testabile pe care viitoarele observații le-ar putea dezvălui a fi false. Popper atrage atenția asupra faptului că teoriile științifice sunt caracterizate prin existența unor falsificatori potențiali - declarații care ar putea fi descoperite ca (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. added 2019-10-27
    Falsificaționismul metodologic.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Falsificaționismul metodologic este o marcă a convenționalismului. Există o delimitare importantă între teoriile "pasiviste" și "activiste" ale cunoașterii. "Pasiviștii susțin că adevărata cunoaștere este amprenta naturii pe o minte perfect inertă: activitatea mentală poate duce numai la părtinire și distorsiune. Cea mai influentă școală pasivistă este empirismul clasic. "Activiștii" susțin că nu putem citi cartea naturii fără activitate mentală, fără a o interpreta în lumina așteptărilor sau a teoriilor noastre. "Activiștii" conservatori susțin că suntem născuți cu așteptările noastre de bază; (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. added 2019-10-16
    Una presentación formal del falsacionismo.Luis Felipe Bartolo Alegre - forthcoming - Analítica.
    In this paper I present the concepts of falsificationism omitting Popper's requirement of consistency. This omission makes (i) trivial theories falsifiable in an inappropriate sense of the term, but also (ii) some inconsistent non trivial theories in an appropriate sense of the term. This justifies a slight alteration of the definition of falsifiability that excludes (i) but allows (ii). Instead of requiring that a falsifiable theories be consistent, the new definition only requires that the intersection of its classes of potential (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. added 2019-10-06
    Lakatos on Dogmatic Falsificationism.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Dogmatic (naturalist) falsificationism accepts the falsifiability of all scientific theories without qualification but preserves an infallible empirical basis. He is strictly empiric without being inductivist: he denies the fact that certainty of the empirical basis can be conveyed to theories. Thus, dogmatic falsificationism is the weakest mark of justification. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15196.33927 .
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. added 2019-09-13
    Proiectarea și modelarea tehnologiei blockchain - Bitcoin.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Ingineria ontologică, împreună cu tehnologiile Web semantice, permit modelarea și dezvoltarea semantică a fluxului operațional necesar pentru proiectarea TB. Cel mai utilizat sistem de modelare blockchain prin reprezentarea abstractă, descrierea și definirea structurii, a proceselor, a informațiilor și a resurselor, este modelarea intreprinderilor. Modelarea intreprinderii utilizează ontologiile de domeniu folosind limbaje de reprezentare a modelului. Bitcoin este principalul sistem de plată peer-to-peer şi monedă digitală care folosește tehnologia blockchain. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35908.99201 .
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. added 2019-09-10
    Le falsificationnisme dogmatique.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Le falsificationnisme dogmatique accepte la falsifiabilité de toutes les théories scientifiques sans réserve, mais conserve une base empirique infaillible. Il est strictement empirique sans être inductif : il nie que la certitude de la base empirique puisse être transmise aux théories. Ainsi, le falsificationnisme dogmatique est donc la marque de justification la plus faible. Le signe distinctif de la falsification dogmatique est la reconnaissance du fait que toutes les théories sont également conjecturales. La science ne peut prouver aucune théorie, mais (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. added 2019-09-04
    Pseudoștiința.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Delimitarea dintre știință și pseudoștiință face parte din sarcina mai generală de a determina care credințe sunt justificate epistemic. Știința poate fi descrisă ca fiind parțial descriptivă, parțial normativă. O definiție a științei se poate concentra pe conținutul descriptiv și specifică modul în care termenul este utilizat efectiv, sau, se poate concentra asupra elementului normativ și poate clarifica sensul mai fundamental al termenului. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13182.74569.
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. added 2019-07-25
    Pseudoscience et falsifiabilité.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    La délimitation entre science et pseudoscience fait partie de la tâche plus générale qui consiste à déterminer quelles croyances sont épistémologiquement justifiées. Karl Popper a proposé la falsifiabilité comme critère important de distinction entre science et pseudoscience. Il soutient que la vérification et la confirmation ne peuvent jouer aucun rôle dans la formulation d'un critère de délimitation satisfaisant. Au lieu de cela, il propose que les théories scientifiques soient distinguées des théories non-scientifiques par des affirmations vérifiables que les observations futures (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. added 2019-06-29
    Critici ale falsificabilității.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Thomas Kuhn a criticat falsificabilitatea pentru că a caracterizat "întreaga întreprindere științifică în termeni care se aplică doar părților revoluționare ocazionale". Potrivit lui Kuhn, modul în care știința funcționează în astfel de ocazii nu poate fi folosit pentru a caracteriza întreaga întreprindere științifică. În opinia lui Kuhn, un criteriu de delimitare trebuie să se refere la funcționarea științei normale. Kuhn obiectează împotriva întregii teorii a lui Popper și exclude orice posibilitate de reconstrucție rațională a dezvoltării științei. În opinia lui Kuhn, (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22. added 2019-03-30
    Support and Trend of Falsifiability.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Popper's supporters argued that most criticism is based on an incomprehensible interpretation of his ideas. They argue that Popper should not be interpreted as meaning that falsifiability is a sufficient condition for the demarcation of science. Some passages seem to suggest that he considers it is only a necessary condition. Other passages would suggest that for a theory to be scientific, Popper requires (besides falsifiability) other tests, and that negative test results are accepted. A demarcation criterion based on falsifiability that (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. added 2019-03-25
    Criticism of Falsifiability.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Thomas Kuhn criticized falsifiability because it characterized "the entire scientific enterprise in terms that apply only to its occasional revolutionary parts," and it cannot be generalized. In Kuhn's view, a delimitation criterion must refer to the functioning of normal science. Kuhn objects to Popper's entire theory and excludes any possibility of rational reconstruction of the development of science. Imre Lakatos said that if a theory is scientific or non-scientific, it can be determined independently of the facts.He proposed a modification of (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24. added 2019-03-15
    Falsification and Refutation.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    A scientific theory, according to Popper, can be legitimately saved from falsification by introducing an auxiliary hypothesis to generate new, falsifiable predictions. Also, if there are suspicions of bias or error, the researchers might introduce an auxiliary falsifiable hypothesis that would allow testing. But this technique can not solve the problem in general, because any auxiliary hypothesis can be challenged in the same way, ad infinitum. To solve this regression, Popper introduces the idea of ​​a basic statement, an empirical statement (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. added 2019-02-14
    Science and Pseudoscience - Falsifiability.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    The delimitation between science and pseudoscience is part of the more general task of determining which beliefs are epistemologically justified. Standards for demarcation may vary by domain, but several basic principles are universally accepted. Karl Popper proposed falsifiability as an important criterion in distinguishing between science and pseudoscience. He argues that verification and confirmation can play no role in formulating a satisfactory criterion of demarcation. Instead, it proposes that scientific theories be distinguished from non-scientific theories by testable claims that future (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. added 2019-01-21
    Karl Popper și problema demarcației între știință și ne-știință.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    Karl Popper, ca raționalist critic, a fost un oponent al tuturor formelor de scepticism, convenționalism și relativism în știință. În 1935 a scris Logica cercetării (Logik der Forschung. Zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft), traducând ulterior cartea în engleză și publicând-o sub titlul The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1959) considerată ca o lucrare de pionierat în domeniu. Multe dintre argumentele din această carte sunt îndreptate împotriva membrilor "Cercului Vienez", precum Moritz Schlick, Otto Neurath, Rudolph Carnap, Hans Reichenbach, Carl Hempel și Herbert (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. added 2018-11-28
    Popper e o problema da predição prática.Eros Moreira De Carvalho - 2011 - Analytica (Rio) 15 (2):123-146.
    The problem of rational prediction, launched by Wesley Salmon, is without doubt the Achilles heel of the critical method defended by Popper. In this paper, I assess the response given both by Popper and by the popperian Alan Musgrave to this problem. Both responses are inadequate and thus the conclusion of Salmon is reinforced: without appeal to induction, there is no way to make of the practical prediction a rational action. Furthermore, the critical method needs to be vindicated if one (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. added 2016-01-29
    Karl Popper: Philosophy of Science.Brendan Shea - 2016 - In James Fieser & Bradley Dowden (eds.), Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Karl Popper (1902-1994) was one of the most influential philosophers of science of the 20th century. He made significant contributions to debates concerning general scientific methodology and theory choice, the demarcation of science from non-science, the nature of probability and quantum mechanics, and the methodology of the social sciences. His work is notable for its wide influence both within the philosophy of science, within science itself, and within a broader social context. Popper’s early work attempts to solve the problem of (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  29. added 2015-12-22
    A Critique of Popper's Views on Scientific Method.Nicholas Maxwell - 1972 - Philosophy of Science 39 (2):131-152.
    This paper considers objections to Popper's views on scientific method. It is argued that criticism of Popper's views, developed by Kuhn, Feyerabend, and Lakatos, are not too damaging, although they do require that Popper's views be modified somewhat. It is argued that a much more serious criticism is that Popper has failed to provide us with any reason for holding that the methodological rules he advocates give us a better hope of realizing the aims of science than any other set (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  30. added 2015-12-19
    Falsification of Theories Without Verification of Basic Statements – an Argument for the Possibility of Knowledge Growth.Rainer Willi Maurer - manuscript
    Karl Popper rightly contests the possibility of a verification of basic statements. At the same time he strictly believes in the possibility of growth of empirical knowledge. Knowledge growth, however, is only possible if empirical theories can be falsified. This raises the question, how theories can be falsified, if a verification of those statements that falsify theories – i.e. basic statements – is not possible. This problem is often referred to as the “basic problem” or “problem of the empirical basis”. (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. added 2015-12-19
    Science Without Inductivism.Ningombam Bupenda Meitei - 2013 - viXra.Org:6.
    The paper aims to expound on the issue of science being different from non science or prescience in the form of the scientific methodology used. Popper’s method of falsifiability ensures the aim of science to be successful. The aim of science which also needs a critical attitude, can enable scientific progress by rejecting inductivism as its scientific methodology. Popper’s view on what the aim of science is and why and how inductivism fails in the case of science, along with examples (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. added 2015-12-19
    Popper, Refutation and 'Avoidance' of Refutation.Greg Bamford - 1989 - Dissertation, The University of Queensland
    Popper's account of refutation is the linchpin of his famous view that the method of science is the method of conjecture and refutation. This thesis critically examines his account of refutation, and in particular the practice he deprecates as avoiding a refutation. I try to explain how he comes to hold the views that he does about these matters; how he seeks to make them plausible; how he has influenced others to accept his mistakes, and how some of the ideas (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  33. added 2015-12-19
    Poppers zwei Definitionsvarianten von 'falsifizierbar'. Eine logische Notiz zu einer klassischen Stelle aus der 'Logik der Forschung'.Georg J. W. Dorn - 1984 - Conceptus: Zeitschrift Fur Philosophie 18:42–49.
    In paragraph 21 of his "Logic of Scientific Discovery", Karl Popper characterizes with the help of two seemingly synonymous definitions the falsifiability of a theory as a logical relation between the theory itself and its basic statements. It is shown that his definitions do not agree with each other, and this result is applied to the problem of the falsifiability of contradictions, to the difference between falsifiable and empirical statements and to the demarcation criterion.
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. added 2015-07-28
    Falsification and Future Performance.David Balduzzi - manuscript
    We information-theoretically reformulate two measures of capacity from statistical learning theory: empirical VC-entropy and empirical Rademacher complexity. We show these capacity measures count the number of hypotheses about a dataset that a learning algorithm falsifies when it finds the classifier in its repertoire minimizing empirical risk. It then follows from that the future performance of predictors on unseen data is controlled in part by how many hypotheses the learner falsifies. As a corollary we show that empirical VC-entropy quantifies the message (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  35. added 2015-07-23
    Popper e a Falsificabilidade do Evolucionismo Darwinista.Francisco Abreu - 2007 - Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 63 (1/3):351 - 389.
    Objectivo principal do presente artigo é mostrar até que ponto o evolucionismo darwinista inclui proposições centrais testáveis, para além de várias proposições acessórias também elas testáveis. Nesse sentido, o autor constrói um argumento no sentido de mostrar que as alegações de Karl Popper, segundo as quais não pode ser concedido estatuto de cientificidade ao darwinismo, carecem de fundamento. O autor defende também a necessidade de um questionamento firme em relação a todo e qualquer argumento fornecido pela ciência, pois nem a (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36. added 2015-07-17
    Falsifiable Implies Learnable.David Balduzzi - manuscript
    The paper demonstrates that falsifiability is fundamental to learning. We prove the following theorem for statistical learning and sequential prediction: If a theory is falsifiable then it is learnable -- i.e. admits a strategy that predicts optimally. An analogous result is shown for universal induction.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark