Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (5)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = epistemological profile

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
40 pages, 5125 KiB  
Article
Challenging Scientific Categorizations Through Dispute Learning
by Renaud Fabre, Patrice Bellot and Daniel Egret
Appl. Sci. 2025, 15(4), 2241; https://doi.org/10.3390/app15042241 - 19 Feb 2025
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1305
Abstract
Scientific dispute and scholarly debate have traditionally served as mechanisms for arbitrating between competing scientific categorizations. However, current AI technologies lack both the ethical framework and technical capabilities to handle the adversarial reasoning inherent in scientific discourse effectively. This creates a ‘categorization conundrum’ [...] Read more.
Scientific dispute and scholarly debate have traditionally served as mechanisms for arbitrating between competing scientific categorizations. However, current AI technologies lack both the ethical framework and technical capabilities to handle the adversarial reasoning inherent in scientific discourse effectively. This creates a ‘categorization conundrum’ where new knowledge emerges from opaque black-box systems while simultaneously introducing unresolved vulnerabilities to errors and adversarial attacks. Our research addresses this challenge by examining how to preserve and enhance human dispute’s vital role in the creation, development, and resolution of knowledge categorization, supported by traceable AI assistance. Building on our previous work, which introduced GRAPHYP—a multiverse hypergraph representation of adversarial opinion profiles derived from multimodal web-based documentary traces—we present three key findings. First, we demonstrate that standardizing concepts and methods through ‘Dispute Learning’ not only expands the range of adversarial pathways in scientific categorization but also enables the identification of GRAPHYP model extensions. These extensions accommodate additional forms of human reasoning in adversarial contexts, guided by novel philosophical and methodological frameworks. Second, GRAPHYP’s support for human reasoning through graph-based visualization provides access to a broad spectrum of practical applications in decidable challenging categorizations, which we illustrate through selected case studies. Third, we introduce a hybrid analytical approach combining probabilistic and possibilistic methods, applicable to diverse classical research data types. We identify analytical by-products of GRAPHYP and examine their epistemological implications. Our discussion of standardized representations of documented adversarial uses highlights the enhanced value that structured dispute brings to elicit differential categorizations in the scientific discourse. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Trends in Natural Language Processing)
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 1589 KiB  
Article
Structural and Functional Disparities within the Human Gut Virome in Terms of Genome Topology and Representative Genome Selection
by Werner P. Veldsman, Chao Yang, Zhenmiao Zhang, Yufen Huang, Debajyoti Chowdhury and Lu Zhang
Viruses 2024, 16(1), 134; https://doi.org/10.3390/v16010134 - 17 Jan 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1916
Abstract
Circularity confers protection to viral genomes where linearity falls short, thereby fulfilling the form follows function aphorism. However, a shift away from morphology-based classification toward the molecular and ecological classification of viruses is currently underway within the field of virology. Recent years have [...] Read more.
Circularity confers protection to viral genomes where linearity falls short, thereby fulfilling the form follows function aphorism. However, a shift away from morphology-based classification toward the molecular and ecological classification of viruses is currently underway within the field of virology. Recent years have seen drastic changes in the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses’ operational definitions of viruses, particularly for the tailed phages that inhabit the human gut. After the abolition of the order Caudovirales, these tailed phages are best defined as members of the class Caudoviricetes. To determine the epistemological value of genome topology in the context of the human gut virome, we designed a set of seven experiments to assay the impact of genome topology and representative viral selection on biological interpretation. Using Oxford Nanopore long reads for viral genome assembly coupled with Illumina short-read polishing, we showed that circular and linear virus genomes differ remarkably in terms of genome quality, GC skew, transfer RNA gene frequency, structural variant frequency, cross-reference functional annotation (COG, KEGG, Pfam, and TIGRfam), state-of-the-art marker-based classification, and phage–host interaction. Furthermore, the disparity profile changes during dereplication. In particular, our phage–host interaction results demonstrated that proportional abundances cannot be meaningfully compared without due regard for genome topology and dereplication threshold, which necessitates the need for standardized reporting. As a best practice guideline, we recommend that comparative studies of the human gut virome always report the ratio of circular to linear viral genomes along with the dereplication threshold so that structural and functional metrics can be placed into context when assessing biologically relevant metagenomic properties such as proportional abundance. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Bacterial Viruses)
Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 271 KiB  
Article
Reconceptualizing Scientific Literacy: The Role of Students’ Epistemological Profiles
by Rodrigo Drumond Vieira, Viviane Florentino de Melo, Lucy Avraamidou and João Avelar Lobato
Educ. Sci. 2017, 7(2), 47; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7020047 - 13 Apr 2017
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 7029
Abstract
In this theoretical article we construct an argument for a pedagogical perspective based on the notion of epistemological profiles for scientific literacy for primary and secondary education. Concurrently, we offer a discussion of the implications of this proposal to the preparation of teachers [...] Read more.
In this theoretical article we construct an argument for a pedagogical perspective based on the notion of epistemological profiles for scientific literacy for primary and secondary education. Concurrently, we offer a discussion of the implications of this proposal to the preparation of teachers and the development of their pedagogical skills. Underlining cultural practices in the construction, communication and validation of knowledge—called epistemic practices which are informed by an ideological perspective on science, are implied in the notion of epistemological profiles in the context of science teaching, particularly physics. Using the concept of mass in the context of science education, we discuss how different ideological perspectives on science reflect distinct aspects of reality. Thus, in this paper we propose an ‘order’ and ‘direction’ to scientific literacy and education in science, emphasizing the construction of a clear empirical perspective for primary school and a rationalistic ideological perspective for secondary school. We complement our argument with resources from activity theory and discourse studies, alongside a discussion of issues and challenges. In concluding this paper, we point out that such proposal requires a change in the classroom teaching culture. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Teaching Methods in Science Subjects Promoting Sustainability)
13 pages, 583 KiB  
Article
Strategy Constrained by Cognitive Limits, and the Rationality of Belief-Revision Policies
by Ashton T. Sperry-Taylor
Games 2017, 8(1), 3; https://doi.org/10.3390/g8010003 - 3 Jan 2017
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 8752
Abstract
Strategy is formally defined as a complete plan of action for every contingency in a game. Ideal agents can evaluate every contingency. But real people cannot do so, and require a belief-revision policy to guide their choices in unforeseen contingencies. The objects of [...] Read more.
Strategy is formally defined as a complete plan of action for every contingency in a game. Ideal agents can evaluate every contingency. But real people cannot do so, and require a belief-revision policy to guide their choices in unforeseen contingencies. The objects of belief-revision policies are beliefs, not strategies and acts. Thus, the rationality of belief-revision policies is subject to Bayesian epistemology. The components of any belief-revision policy are credences constrained by the probability axioms, by conditionalization, and by the principles of indifference and of regularity. The principle of indifference states that an agent updates his credences proportionally to the evidence, and no more. The principle of regularity states that an agent assigns contingent propositions a positive (but uncertain) credence. The result is rational constraints on real people’s credences that account for their uncertainty. Nonetheless, there is the open problem of non-evidential components that affect people’s credence distributions, despite the rational constraint on those credences. One non-evidential component is people’s temperaments, which affect people’s evaluation of evidence. The result is there might not be a proper recommendation of a strategy profile for a game (in terms of a solution concept), despite agents’ beliefs and corresponding acts being rational. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Epistemic Game Theory and Logic)
Show Figures

Figure 1

49 pages, 574 KiB  
Article
A Modal Logic of Epistemic Games
by Emiliano Lorini and François Schwarzentruber
Games 2010, 1(4), 478-526; https://doi.org/10.3390/g1040478 - 2 Nov 2010
Cited by 22 | Viewed by 11620
Abstract
We propose some variants of a multi-modal of joint action, preference and knowledge that support reasoning about epistemic games in strategic form. The first part of the paper deals with games with complete information. We first provide syntactic proofs of some well-known theorems [...] Read more.
We propose some variants of a multi-modal of joint action, preference and knowledge that support reasoning about epistemic games in strategic form. The first part of the paper deals with games with complete information. We first provide syntactic proofs of some well-known theorems in the area of interactive epistemology that specify some sufficient epistemic conditions of equilibrium notions such as Nash equilibrium and Iterated Deletion of Strictly Dominated Strategies (IDSDS). Then, we present a variant of the logic extended with dynamic operators of Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL). We show that it allows to express the notion IDSDS in a more compact way. The second part of the paper deals with games with weaker forms of complete information. We first discuss several assumptions on different aspects of perfect information about the game structure (e.g., the assumption that a player has perfect knowledge about the players’ strategy sets or about the preference orderings over strategy profiles), and show that every assumption is expressed by a corresponding logical axiom of our logic. Then we provide a proof of Harsanyi’s claim that all uncertainty about the structure of a game can be reduced to uncertainty about payoffs. Sound and complete axiomatizations of the logics are given, as well as some complexity results for the satisfiability problem. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Epistemic Game Theory and Modal Logic)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Back to TopTop