(2011) 26 Liburuki. 1 Zenbakia;;(2011) Volumen 26. Número 1http://hdl.handle.net/10810/391542024-03-28T11:11:42Z2024-03-28T11:11:42ZModels for prediction, explanation and control: recursive bayesian networksCasini, LorenzoIllari, Phyllis MckayRusso, FedericaWilliamson, Jonhttp://hdl.handle.net/10810/394542020-01-30T02:28:56Z2011-01-01T00:00:00ZModels for prediction, explanation and control: recursive bayesian networks
Casini, Lorenzo; Illari, Phyllis Mckay; Russo, Federica; Williamson, Jon
The Recursive Bayesian Net (RBN) formalism was originally developed for modelling nested causal relationships. In this paper we argue that the formalism can also be applied to modelling the hierarchical structure of mechanisms. The resulting network contains quantitative information about probabilities, as well as qualitative information about mechanistic structure and causal relations. Since information about probabilities, mechanisms and causal relations is vital for prediction, explanation and control respectively, an RBN can be applied to all these tasks. We show in particular how a simple two-level RBN can be used to model a mechanism in cancer science. The higher level of our model contains variables at the clinical level, while the lower level maps the structure of the cell's mechanism for apoptosis.
2011-01-01T00:00:00ZLa centralidad de la Fundación Rockefeller en el desarrollo de la biología molecular revisada: una extensión de la crítica de Abir-Am a la luz del modelo del operónGarcía Deister, Vivettehttp://hdl.handle.net/10810/394552020-01-30T02:28:57Z2011-01-01T00:00:00ZLa centralidad de la Fundación Rockefeller en el desarrollo de la biología molecular revisada: una extensión de la crítica de Abir-Am a la luz del modelo del operón
García Deister, Vivette
Abir-Am ha criticado la visión estándar de que la Fundación Rockefeller (FR) jugó un papel central en el surgimiento de la biología molecular durante la década de 1960. En su opinión, la FR aceleró la molecularización de las ciencias de la vida, pero no intervino de manera directa en el surgimiento de la biología molecular como disciplina. Aquí sostengo que esta crítica tiene consecuencias mayores a las que sospechó su autora y muestro que la tesis de la centralidad de la FR en el desarrollo de la biología molecular no se puede desmantelar sin alterar también la visión de la biología molecular como una disciplina orientada a la resolución de problemas predefinidos.
2011-01-01T00:00:00ZBeebee and Sabbarton-Leary, eds. 2010. The Semantics and Metaphysics of Natural KindsFernández Moreno, Luishttp://hdl.handle.net/10810/394562020-01-30T02:28:57Z2011-01-01T00:00:00ZBeebee and Sabbarton-Leary, eds. 2010. The Semantics and Metaphysics of Natural Kinds
Fernández Moreno, Luis
2011-01-01T00:00:00ZThe relation between classical and quantum electrodynamicsBacelar Valente, Mariohttp://hdl.handle.net/10810/394532020-01-30T02:28:56Z2011-01-01T00:00:00ZThe relation between classical and quantum electrodynamics
Bacelar Valente, Mario
Quantum electrodynamics presents intrinsic limitations in the description of physical processes that make it impossible to recover from it the type of description we have in classical electrodynamics. Hence one cannot consider classical electrodynamics as reducing to quantum electrodynamics and being recovered from it by some sort of limiting procedure. Quantum electrodynamics has to be seen not as an more fundamental theory, but as an upgrade of classical electrodynamics, which permits an extension of classical theory to the description of phenomena that, while being related to the conceptual framework of the classical theory, cannot be addressed from the classical theory.
2011-01-01T00:00:00Z