(https://tinyurl.com/y27y76f2)[Multi-ductive Reasoning for Situational Awareness]
Blog Article/Post Caveat (Read First Please: Click the Link)
Vigilant Diligence in Multi-deductive Awareness. Let us then add that to work, abductive reasoning as a means to attain vigilant awareness of situations, etc., it must have a source of knowledge and understanding to trigger proper appropriate results. For instance, the knowledge and understanding of MM's NAD paradigm, i.e., you must know what is NORMAL, what is ABNORMAL and what is DANGEROUS to achieve that situational awareness of any environment and situations within that environment. The following is the basic principle of abductive reasoning.
Abductive reasoning starts with specific observations and seeks the most likely explanation for them.
It is the equivalent of the best guess.
It is a helpful way to process the real world.
Abduction, or inference to the best explanation, is a method of reasoning in which one chooses the hypothesis that would, if true, best explain the relevant evidence. Abductive reasoning starts from a set of accepted facts and infers most likely, or best, explanations. The term "abduction" also sometimes only refers to the generation of hypotheses that explain observations or conclusions.
Example: "When it rains, the grass gets wet. The grass is wet, it must have rained." Violence Professionals, Detectives, and Doctors, etc., are commonly associated with this style of reasoning.
Abduction can produce results that are incorrect within its formal system. However, it can still be useful as a heuristic, especially when something is known about the likelihood of different causes for "something."
This process, unlike deductive reasoning, yields a plausible conclusion but does not positively verify it. Abductive conclusions are thus qualified as having a remnant of uncertainty or doubt, which is expressed in retreat terms such as "best available" or "most likely". One can understand abductive reasoning as inference to the best explanation...
Abductive validation is the process of validating a given hypothesis through abductive reasoning. This can also be called reasoning through successive approximation. Under this principle, an explanation is valid if it is the best possible explanation of a set of known data. The best possible explanation is often defined in terms of simplicity and elegance (see Occam's razor: paraphrased by statements like "the simplest explanation is most likely the right one". [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor]).
For reference and sources and professionals go here: Bibliography (Click the link)
No comments:
Post a Comment