Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T16:05:08.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Curve Fitting, the Reliability of Inductive Inference, and the Error-Statistical Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Aris Spanos
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The main aim of this paper is to revisit the curve fitting problem using the reliability of inductive inference as a primary criterion for the ‘fittest’ curve. Viewed from this perspective, it is argued that a crucial concern with the current framework for addressing the curve fitting problem is, on the one hand, the undue influence of the mathematical approximation perspective, and on the other, the insufficient attention paid to the statistical modeling aspects of the problem. Using goodness-of-fit as the primary criterion for ‘best’, the mathematical approximation perspective undermines the reliability of inference objective by giving rise to selection rules which pay insufficient attention to ‘accounting for the regularities in the data’. A more appropriate framework is offered by the error-statistical approach, where (i) statistical adequacy provides the criterion for assessing when a curve captures the regularities in the data adequately, and (ii) the relevant error probabilities can be used to assess the reliability of inductive inference. Broadly speaking, the fittest curve (statistically adequate) is not determined by the smallness if its residuals, tempered by simplicity or other pragmatic criteria, but by the nonsystematic (e.g. white noise) nature of its residuals. The advocated error-statistical arguments are illustrated by comparing the Kepler and Ptolemaic models on empirical grounds.

Type
Philosophy of Probability and Statistics
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 74 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2006 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers. Edited by Cristina Bicchieri and Jason Alexander , December 2007 , pp. 1046 - 1066
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

I am grateful to Deborah Mayo and Clark Glymour for many valuable suggestions and comments on an earlier draft of the paper; estimating the Ptolemaic model was the result of Glymour's prompting and encouragement.

References

Babb, S. E. (1977), “Accuracy of Planetary Theories, Particularly for Mars”, Accuracy of Planetary Theories, Particularly for Mars 68:426–434.Google Scholar
Bohr, H. (1949), “On Almost Periodic Functions and the Theory of Groups”, On Almost Periodic Functions and the Theory of Groups 56:595–609.Google Scholar
Cox, D. R., and Hinkley, D. V. (1974), Theoretical Statistics. London: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahliquist, G., and Bjorck, A. (1974), Numerical Methods. Translated by Anderson, N.. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Einstein, A. (1954), Ideas and Opinions. New York: Three Rivers Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. A. (1935), The Design of Experiments. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
Forster, M. and Sober, E. (1994), “How to Tell When Simpler, More Unified, or Less Ad Hoc Theories Will Provide More Accurate Predictions”, How to Tell When Simpler, More Unified, or Less Ad Hoc Theories Will Provide More Accurate Predictions 45:1–35.Google Scholar
Gauss, C. F. (1809), Theoria Motus Corporum Coelestium in Sectionibus Conicis Solem Ambientium. Hamburg: Perthes & Besser.Google Scholar
Glymour, C. (1981), Theory and Evidence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Isaacson, E., and Keller, H. B. (1994), Analysis of Numerical Methods. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Kieseppa, I. A. (1997), “Akaike Information Criterion, Curve Fitting, and the Philosophical Problem of Simplicity”, Akaike Information Criterion, Curve Fitting, and the Philosophical Problem of Simplicity 48:21–48.Google Scholar
Laudan, L. (1977), Progress and Its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Legendre, A. M. (1805), Nouvelles méthodes pour la détermination des orbites des comètes. Paris: Courcier.Google Scholar
Linton, C. M. (2004), From Eudoxus to Einstein: A History of Mathematical Astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mayo, D. G. (1991), “Novel Evidence and Severe Tests”, Novel Evidence and Severe Tests 58:523–552.Google Scholar
Mayo, D. G. (1996), Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayo, D. G., and Spanos, A. (2004), “Methodology in Practice: Statistical Misspecification Testing”, Methodology in Practice: Statistical Misspecification Testing 71:1007–1025.Google Scholar
Rao, C. R., and Wu, Y. (2001), “On Model Selection”, in Lahiri, P. (ed.), Model Selection. Lecture Notes—Monograph Series, vol. 38. Beachwood, OH: Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 1–64.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. (1967), The Foundations of Scientific Inference. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skyrms, B. (2000), Choice and Chance: An Introduction to Inductive Logic. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.Google Scholar
Spanos, A. (1986), Statistical Foundations of Econometric Modelling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spanos, A. (1995), “On Theory Testing in Econometrics: Modeling with Nonexperimental Data”, On Theory Testing in Econometrics: Modeling with Nonexperimental Data 67:189–226.Google Scholar
Spanos, A. (1999), Probability Theory and Statistical Inference: Econometric Modeling with Observational Data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Spanos, A. (2000), “Revisiting Data Mining: ‘Hunting’ with or without a License”, Revisiting Data Mining: ‘Hunting’ with or without a License 7:231–264.Google Scholar
Spanos, A. (2006a), “Econometrics in Retrospect and Prospect”, in Mills, T. C. and Patterson, K. (eds.), New Palgrave Handbook of Econometrics, Vol. 1. London: Macmillan, 3–58.Google Scholar
Spanos, A. (2006b), “Revisiting the Omitted Variables Argument: Substantive vs. Statistical Adequacy”, Revisiting the Omitted Variables Argument: Substantive vs. Statistical Adequacy 13:179–218.Google Scholar
Spanos, A. (2006c), “Statistical Model Specification vs. Model Selection: Akaike-Type Criteria and the Reliability of Inference”, manuscript.Google Scholar
Spanos, A., and McGuirk, A. (2001), “The Model Specification Problem from a Probabilistic Reduction Perspective”, The Model Specification Problem from a Probabilistic Reduction Perspective 83:1168–1176.Google Scholar