4.7 Review

On scientific understanding with artificial intelligence

Journal

NATURE REVIEWS PHYSICS
Volume 4, Issue 12, Pages 761-769

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s42254-022-00518-3

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Canada 150 Research Chairs Program
  2. University of Toronto and Anders G. Froseth
  3. FWF (Austrian Science Fund) [J4309]
  4. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) [191127]
  5. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [J4309] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Scientists aim to understand the principles behind predictions rather than just being satisfied with accurate results. With the advancement of computational power and artificial intelligence, the role of these systems in contributing to scientific understanding becomes a significant question.
An oracle that correctly predicts the outcome of every particle physics experiment, the products of every possible chemical reaction or the function of every protein would revolutionize science and technology. However, scientists would not be entirely satisfied because they would want to comprehend how the oracle made these predictions. This is scientific understanding, one of the main aims of science. With the increase in the available computational power and advances in artificial intelligence, a natural question arises: how can advanced computational systems, and specifically artificial intelligence, contribute to new scientific understanding or gain it autonomously? Trying to answer this question, we adopted a definition of 'scientific understanding' from the philosophy of science that enabled us to overview the scattered literature on the topic and, combined with dozens of anecdotes from scientists, map out three dimensions of computer-assisted scientific understanding. For each dimension, we review the existing state of the art and discuss future developments. We hope that this Perspective will inspire and focus research directions in this multidisciplinary emerging field.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available