论文标题
渠道的“确认和预测”确认：从医疗测试到乌鸦悖论
Channels' Confirmation and Predictions' Confirmation: from the Medical Test to the Raven Paradox
论文作者
论文摘要
在实证主义和伪造主义之间进行了长时间的争论之后，对普遍假设的验证被确认不确定的主要前提所取代。不幸的是，Hemple发现了乌鸦悖论（RP）。然后，CarNAP使用逻辑概率增量作为确认度量。到目前为止，已经提出了许多确认措施。凯梅尼（Kemeny）和奥本海姆（Oppenheim）提出的措施F具有埃尔斯（Elles）和菲尔森（Fitelson）提出的对称性和不对称性，Greco等人提出的单调性以及许多研究人员建议的归一化属性。基于语义信息理论，类似于F的度量B*是从医学测试中得出的。像似然比一样，b*和f只能指示通道的质量或测试的含义，而不是概率预测的质量。而且，使用B*，F或其他措施来澄清RP仍然不容易。因此，得出与正确速率相似的测量C*。 C*具有简单的形式：（a-c）/max（a，c）;它支持NICOD标准并破坏等效条件，因此可以使用来消除RP。提供了一些示例，以说明为什么很难使用一种流行的确认措施来消除RP。测量f，b*和c*表明，更少的反例的存在比更积极的例子的存在更重要，因此，与Popper的伪造思想兼容。
After long arguments between positivism and falsificationism, the verification of universal hypotheses was replaced with the confirmation of uncertain major premises. Unfortunately, Hemple discovered the Raven Paradox (RP). Then, Carnap used the logical probability increment as the confirmation measure. So far, many confirmation measures have been proposed. Measure F among them proposed by Kemeny and Oppenheim possesses symmetries and asymmetries proposed by Elles and Fitelson, monotonicity proposed by Greco et al., and normalizing property suggested by many researchers. Based on the semantic information theory, a measure b* similar to F is derived from the medical test. Like the likelihood ratio, b* and F can only indicate the quality of channels or the testing means instead of the quality of probability predictions. And, it is still not easy to use b*, F, or another measure to clarify the RP. For this reason, measure c* similar to the correct rate is derived. The c* has the simple form: (a-c)/max(a, c); it supports the Nicod Criterion and undermines the Equivalence Condition, and hence, can be used to eliminate the RP. Some examples are provided to show why it is difficult to use one of popular confirmation measures to eliminate the RP. Measure F, b*, and c* indicate that fewer counterexamples' existence is more essential than more positive examples' existence, and hence, are compatible with Popper's falsification thought.
