Cover Image
QR Code

No free theory choice from machine learning.

Ravit Dotan argues that a No Free Lunch theorem (NFL) from machine learning shows epistemic values are insufficient for deciding the truth of scientific hypotheses. She argues that NFL shows that the best case accuracy of scientific hypotheses is no more than chance. Since accuracy underpins every e...

Full description

Published in:Synthese Vol. 200; no. 5; pp. 1 - 23
Main Author: Rushing, Bruce
Format: Article
Published: Springer Nature Oct2022
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=159453452&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 159453452
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00397857
        4LI
      jtl: Synthese
      issn: 00397857
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2022
      vid: 200
      iid: 5
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        159453452
        10.1007/s11229-022-03901-w
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 22
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 325KB
      tig:
        atl: No free theory choice from machine learning.
      aug:
        au: Rushing, Bruce
        affil: University of California, Irvine (Logic and Philosophy of Science), Irvine, (CA), USA
      sug:
      keyword:
        Epistemic values
        General philosophy of science
        Machine Learning
        No free lunch theorem
        Theory choice
      ab: Ravit Dotan argues that a No Free Lunch theorem (NFL) from machine learning shows epistemic values are insufficient for deciding the truth of scientific hypotheses. She argues that NFL shows that the best case accuracy of scientific hypotheses is no more than chance. Since accuracy underpins every epistemic value, non-epistemic values are needed to assess the truth of scientific hypotheses. However, NFL cannot be coherently applied to the problem of theory choice. The NFL theorem Dotan’s argument relies upon is a member of a family of theorems in search, optimization, and machine learning. They all claim to show that if no assumptions are made about a search or optimization problem or learning situation, then the best case performance of an algorithm is that of random search or random guessing. A closer inspection shows that these theorems all rely upon assigning uniform probabilities over problems or learning situations, which is just the Principle of Indifference. A counterexample can be crafted that shows that NFL cannot be coherently applied across different descriptions of the same learning situation. To avoid this counterexample, Dotan needs to privilege some description of the learning situation faced by scientists. However, this means that NFL cannot be applied since an important assumption about the problem is being made. So Dotan faces a dilemma: either NFL leads to incoherent best-case partial beliefs or it is inapplicable to the problem of theory choice. This negative result has implications for the larger debate over theory choice.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2022. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Synthese
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2022
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N