English

From Observations to Hypotheses: Probabilistic Reasoning Versus Falsificationism and its Statistical Variations

Data Analysis, Statistics and Probability 2007-05-23 v2 Astrophysics High Energy Physics - Phenomenology

Abstract

Testing hypotheses is an issue of primary importance in the scientific research, as well as in many other human activities. Much clarification about it can be achieved if the process of learning from data is framed in a stochastic model of causes and effects. Formulated with Poincare's words, the "essential problem of the experimental method" becomes then solving a "problem in the probability of causes", i.e. ranking the several hypotheses, that might be responsible for the observations, in credibility. This probabilistic approach to the problem (nowadays known as the Bayesian approach) differs from the standard (i.e. frequentistic) statistical methods of hypothesis tests. The latter methods might be seen as practical attempts of implementing the ideal of falsificationism, that can itself be viewed as an extension of the proof by contradiction of the classical logic to the experimental method. Some criticisms concerning conceptual as well as practical aspects of na\"\i ve falsificationism and conventional, frequentistic hypothesis tests are presented, and the alternative, probabilistic approach is outlined.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.physics/0412148,
  title  = {From Observations to Hypotheses: Probabilistic Reasoning Versus Falsificationism and its Statistical Variations},
  author = {G. D'Agostini},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:physics/0412148},
  year   = {2007}
}

Comments

17 pages, 4 figures (V2 fixes some typos and adds a reference). Invited talk at the 2004 Vulcano Workshop on Frontier Objects in Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Vulcano (Italy) May 24-29, 2004. This paper and related work are also available at http://www.roma1.infn.it/~dagos/prob+stat.html

R2 v1 2026-07-22T19:02:19.395Z