Search
1996 Volume 11
Article Contents
RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

Computer science research on scientific discovery

More Information
  • Abstract: This article is an essay on directions and methodology in computer-science oriented research on scientific discovery. The essay starts by reviewing briefly some of the history of computing in scientific reasoning, and some of the results and impact that have been achieved. The remainder analyses some of the goals of this field, its relations with sister fields, and the practical applications of this analysis to evaluating research quality, reviewing, and methodology. An earlier review in this journal (Kocabas 1991b) analysed scientific discovery programs in terms of their designs, achievements and shortcomings; the focus here is research directions, evaluation and methodology, all from the viewpoint of computer science.
  • 加载中
  • Bobrow DG and Hayes PJ, 1985, “Artificial intelligence – where are we?” Artificial Intelligence25 (3) 375–415.

    Google Scholar

    Buchanan B, Smith D, White W, Gritter R, Feigenbaum E, Lederberg J and Djerassi C, 1976, “Applications of artificial intelligence for chemical inference. 22. automatic rule formation in mass spectrometry by means of the meta–dendral program” Journal of the American Chemical Society98 (20) 6168–6178.

    Google Scholar

    Carbonell JG, 1992, “Machine learning: A maturing field” Machine Learning95–7.

    Google Scholar

    Crevier D, 1993, Al: The Tumultuous History of the Search for Artificial Intelligence, Basic Books.

    Google Scholar

    Dunbar K, 1995, “How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories.” In: The Nature of Insight, 365–395, MIT Press.

    Google Scholar

    Gelernter H, 1963, “Realization of a geometry-theorem proving machine.” In: Feigenbaum EA and Feldman J, editors, Computers and Thought, McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar

    Gordon A, Edwards P, Sleeman D and Kodratoff Y, 1994, “Scientific discovery in a space of structural models: An example from the history of solution chemistry.” In: Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the Cognitive Science Society381–386.

    Google Scholar

    Hearn AC, 1990, Future Directions for Research in Symbolic Computation, Siam, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar

    Hendrickson J and Toczko A, 1989, “SYNGEN program for synthesis design: basic computing techniques” Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences29 (3) 137–145.

    Google Scholar

    Holmes FL, 1980, “Hans Krebs and the discovery of the ornithine cycle.” In: Proc of 63rd Annual Meeting of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology 39, Symposium on Aspects of the History of Biochemistry.

    Google Scholar

    Klahr D and Dunbar K, 1988, “Dual space search during scientific reasoning” Cognitive Science121–48.

    Google Scholar

    Kocabas S, 1991a, “Conflict re/ution as discovery in particle physics” Machine Learning6 (3), 05, 277–309.

    Google Scholar

    Kocabas S, 1991b, “Computational models of scientific discovery”, Knowledge Engineering Review6 (4) 259–305.

    Google Scholar

    Kulkarni D and Simon H, 1988, “The processes of scientific discovery: The strategy of experimentation” Cognitive Science12139–175.

    Google Scholar

    Langley P, 1986, “Editorial: On machine learning” Machine Learning15–10.

    Google Scholar

    Langley P and Michalski RS, 1986, “Editorial: Machine learning and discovery” Machine Learning1363–366.

    Google Scholar

    Langley P, Simon H, Bradshaw G and Zytkow J. 1987, Scientific Discovery. Computational Explorations of the Creative Processes, MIT Press.

    Google Scholar

    Lea G and Simon HA, 1974, “Problem /ving and rule induction: A uniuleld view.” In: Gregg LW, editor, Knowledge and Cognition, Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar

    Lindsay R, Buchanan B, Feigenbaum E and Lederberg J, 1980, Applications of Artificial Intelligence for Organic Chemistry: The Dendral Project, McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar

    Lindsay R, Buchanan B, Feigenbaum E amd Lederberg J, 1993, “DENDRAL: a case study of the first expert system for scientific hypothesis formation” Artificial Intelligence61(2) 06, 209–261.

    Google Scholar

    Mackenzie D, 1995, “The automation of proof: a historical and sociological exploration” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing17 (3) 7–29.

    Google Scholar

    Newell A, 1983, “The heuristic of George Polya and its relation to artificial intelligence.” In: Groner R, Groner M and Bischof W, editors, Methods of Heuristics, Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar

    Newell A and Simon HA, 1972, Human Problem /ving, Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar

    Newell A and Simon HA, 1976, “Computer science as empirical inquiry: Symbols and search” Communications of the ACM19111–126.

    Google Scholar

    Oliver JE, 1991, The Incomplete Guide to the Art of Discovery, Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Salmon W, 1966, The Foundations of Scientific Inference, University of Pittsburgh Press. In: Shrager J and Langley P, editors, Computational Models of Scientific Discovery and Theory formation, Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar

    Simon HA, 1987, “Why should machines learn” Machine Learning125–38.

    Google Scholar

    Spirtes P, Glymour C and Schemes R, 1993, Causation, Prediction, and Search, Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar

    Stevenson D, 1994, “Science, computational science, and computer science: At a crossroads” Communications of the ACM37 (12) 12, 85–96.

    Google Scholar

    Thagard P and Nowak G, 1990, “The conceptual structure of the geological revolution.” In: Shrager J and Langley P, editors, Computational Models of Scientific Discovery and Theory Formation27–172, Morgan Kaufman.

    Google Scholar

    Tweney RD, 1990, “Five questions for computationalists.” In: Shrager J and Langley P, editors, Computational Models of Scientific Discovery and Theory Formation471–484, Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar

    Valdés-Perez RE, 1994a, “Algebraic reasoning about reactions: Discovery of conserved properties in particle physics” Machine Learning17 (1) 47–68.

    Google Scholar

    Valdes-Perez RE, 1994b, “Human/computer interactive elucidation of reaction mechanisms: Application to catalyzed hydrogenolysis of ethane” Catalysis Letters28(1) 09, 79–87.

    Google Scholar

    Valdés-Perez RE, 1995a, “Generic tasks of scientific discovery.” In: Working Notes of the Spring Symposium on Systematic Methods of Scientific Discovery, AAAI Technical Reports.

    Google Scholar

    Valdés-Perez RE, 1995b, “Machine discovery in chemistry: New results” Artificial Intelligence74(1) 03, 191–201.

    Google Scholar

    Valdés-Perez RE, 1995c, “Machine discovery praxis” Foundations of Science1(2) 219–224.

    Google Scholar

    Valdés-Perez RE, 1995d, “Some recent human/computer discoveries in science and what accounts for them” Al Magazine16 (3) Fall, 37–44.

    Google Scholar

    Valdés-Perez RE and Erdmann M, 1994, “Systematic induction and parsimony of phenomenological conservation laws” Computer Physics Communications83(–3) 171–180.

    Google Scholar

    Zytkow J, 1993, Machine Learning12 (1). Special double issue on machine discovery.

    Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Raúl E. Valdés-Pérez. 1996. Computer science research on scientific discovery. The Knowledge Engineering Review. 11:7682 doi: 10.1017/S0269888900007682
    Raúl E. Valdés-Pérez. 1996. Computer science research on scientific discovery. The Knowledge Engineering Review. 11:7682 doi: 10.1017/S0269888900007682

Article Metrics

Article views(19) PDF downloads(176)

Other Articles By Authors

RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

Computer science research on scientific discovery

The Knowledge Engineering Review  11 Article number: 10.1017/S0269888900007682  (1996)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Abstract: This article is an essay on directions and methodology in computer-science oriented research on scientific discovery. The essay starts by reviewing briefly some of the history of computing in scientific reasoning, and some of the results and impact that have been achieved. The remainder analyses some of the goals of this field, its relations with sister fields, and the practical applications of this analysis to evaluating research quality, reviewing, and methodology. An earlier review in this journal (Kocabas 1991b) analysed scientific discovery programs in terms of their designs, achievements and shortcomings; the focus here is research directions, evaluation and methodology, all from the viewpoint of computer science.

    • Copyright © Cambridge University Press 19961996Cambridge University Press
References (39)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Raúl E. Valdés-Pérez. 1996. Computer science research on scientific discovery. The Knowledge Engineering Review. 11:7682 doi: 10.1017/S0269888900007682
    Raúl E. Valdés-Pérez. 1996. Computer science research on scientific discovery. The Knowledge Engineering Review. 11:7682 doi: 10.1017/S0269888900007682
  • Catalog

      /

      DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
      Return
      Return