Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Inductive Reasoning and Chance Discovery

  • Published:
Minds and Machines Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper argues that chance (risk or opportunity) discovery is challenging, from a reasoning point of view, because it represents a dilemma for inductive reasoning. Chance discovery shares many features with the grue paradox. Consequently, Bayesian approaches represent a potential solution. The Bayesian solution evaluates alternative models generated using a temporal logic planner to manage the chance. Surprise indices are used in monitoring the conformity of the real world and the assessed probabilities. Game theoretic approaches are proposed to deal with multi-agent interaction in chance management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brown, J.S.and Burton, R.R.(1978), 'Diagnostic Models for Procedural Bugs in Basic Mathematical Skills', Cognitive Science 2(2), pp.155-192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akeroyd, A.(1991), 'A Practical Example of Grue', British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 42(4), pp.535-539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacchus, F. Grove, A., Halpern, J.and Koller, D.(1996), 'From Statistical Knowledge to Degrees of Belief', Artificial Intelligence 87, pp.75-143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacchus, F.and Kabanza, F.(2000), 'Using Temporal Logics to Express Search Control Knowledge for Planning', Artificial Intelligence 116(1-2), pp.123-191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayarri, M.and Berger, J.(1997), 'Measures of Surprise in Bayesian Analysis', Duke University Institute of Statistics and Decision Sciences Working Paper No.97-46, Durham, North Carolina.

  • Boutilier, C.(1999), 'Sequential Optimality and Coordination in Multiagent Systems', in Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

  • Dean, T.and Kanazawa, K.(1989), 'A Model for Reasoning about Persistence and Causation', Computational Intelligence 5(3), pp.142-150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edis, T.(2000), 'Resolving Goodman 's Paradox:How to Defuse Inductive Skepticism ', Unpublished Manuscript.http://www2.truman.edu/edis/.

  • Fenster, M., Kraus, S.and Rusenschein, J.(1995), 'Coordination without Communications: Experimental Validation of Focal Point Techniques ', in Proceedings of the First Interna-tional Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS-95), San Francisco, CA.

  • Good, I.J.(1983), Good Thinking:The Foundation of Probability and its Applications, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, J.and Koller, D.(2004), 'Representation Dependence in Probabilistic Inference', Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 21, pp.319-356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horwich, P.(1982), Probability and Evidence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaynes, E.T.(1968), 'Prior Probabilities', IEEE Transactions on System Science and Cybernetics 4, pp.227-241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kripke, S.(1963), 'Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic I:Normal Modal Propositional Calculi', Zeitschrift f.Math.Logik und Grunlagen d.Math.9, pp.67-96.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBurney, P.(2001), 'Review of:First International Workshop on Chance Discovery', Knowledge Engineering Review 16(2), pp.215-218.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBurney, P.and Parsons, S.(2001), 'Chance Discovery Using Dialectical Argumentation', in Y.Ohsawa, ed., Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Chance Discovery, Matsue, Japan, pp.37-45.

  • McCarthy, J.and Hayes, P.(1969), 'Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence', Machine Intelligence 4, pp.463-502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, N.(1955), 'The New Riddle of Induction', Fact, Fiction and Forecast, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohsawa, Y.(ed.)(2001), Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Chance Discovery Matsue, Japan:Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence.

  • Osborne, M.and Rubinstein, A.(1994), A Course in Game Theory Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peshkin, L., Kim, K., Meuleau, M.and Kaelbling, L.(2000), 'Learning to Cooperate via Policy Search', Proceedings of the Sixteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence.

  • Prendinger, H.and Ishizuka, M.(2001), 'Some Methodological Considerations on Chance Discovery ', in Y.Ohsawa, ed., Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Chance Discovery, Matsue, Japan, pp.1-4.

  • Schelling, T.(1960), A Strategy of Conflict, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanahan, M.(1997), Solving the Frame Problem, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomono., R.(1999), 'Two Kinds of Probabilistic Induction', The Computer Journal 42(4), pp.251-259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, W.(1948), 'Probability, Rarity, Interest and Surprise', Scientific Monthly 67, pp.390-392.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer Science, University of Windsor, Windsor, Canada, ON N9B 3P4

    Ahmed Y. Tawfik

Authors
  1. Ahmed Y. Tawfik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tawfik, A.Y. Inductive Reasoning and Chance Discovery. Minds and Machines 14, 441–451 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:MIND.0000045987.92742.71

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:MIND.0000045987.92742.71

Search

Navigation