
TL;DR
The paper clarifies that the scientific method involves building logical, self-consistent models constrained by observations, which are used to predict phenomena and are judged by their predictive success.
Contribution
It defines the scientific method as model-building constrained by observations, emphasizing the importance of testability and reproducibility, and clarifies misconceptions about its existence.
Findings
Scientific models are constrained by past observations.
Models are judged by their ability to predict new phenomena.
Unnecessary assumptions are rejected if not testable.
Abstract
The nature of the scientific method is controversial with claims that a single scientific method does not even exist. However the scientific method does exist. It is the building of logical and self consistent models to describe nature. The models are constrained by past observations and judged by their ability to correctly predict new observations and interesting phenomena. The observations exist independent of the models but acquire meaning from their context within a model. Observations must be carefully done and reproducible to minimize errors. Models assumptions that do not lead to testable predictions are rejected as unnecessary.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsPhilosophy and History of Science · Science and Climate Studies · Historical Philosophy and Science
