| dc.description.abstract | Although human causal reasoning is widely acknowledged as an object
of scientific enquiry, there is little consensus on an appropriate measure
of progress. Up-to-date evidence of the standard method of research in
the field shows that this method has been rejected at the birth of modern
science.
We describe an instance of the standard scientific method for modelling
causal reasoning (causal calculators). The method allows for uniform
proofs of three relevant computational properties: correctness of the model
with respect to the intended model, full abstraction of the model (function)
with respect to the equivalence of reasoning scenarios (input), and formal
relations of equivalence and subsumption between models. The method
extends and exploits the systematic paradigm [Handbook of Logic in Artificial
Intelligence and Logic Programming, volume IV, p. 439-498, Oxford 1995] to
fit with our interpretation of it.
Using the described method, we present results for some major models,
with an updated summary spanning seventy-two years of research in the
field. | en_US |
