Computational idealizations in software intensive science

a comment on Symons' and Horner's paper

Nicola Angius

pp. 479-484

in: Liesbeth De Mol, Giuseppe Primiero (eds), Trends in the history and philosophy of computing, Philosophy & Technology 27 (3), 2014.

Abstract

This commentary on John Symons' and Jack Horner's paper, besides sharing its main argument, challenges the authors' statement that there is no effective method to evaluate software-intensive systems as a distinguishing feature of software intensive science. It is underlined here how analogous methodological limitations characterise the evaluations of empirical systems in non-software intensive sciences. The authors' claim that formal methods establish the correctness of computational models rather than of the represented programme is here compared with the empirical adequacy problem typifying the model-based reasoning approach in physics, and the remark that testing all the paths of a software-intensive system is unfeasible is related to the enumerative induction problem in the justification of empirical law-like hypotheses in non-software intensive sciences.

Cited authors

Symons John