PhilSci Archive

Contrast Classes and Agreement in Climate Modeling

Dethier, Corey (2024) Contrast Classes and Agreement in Climate Modeling. [Preprint]

This is the latest version of this item.

[img]
Preview
 Text
Dethier - CCACM.pdf
Download (339kB) | Preview

Abstract

It's widely argued that agreement---or ``robustness''---across climate models isn't a useful marker of confirmation: that the models agree on a hypothesis does not indicate that that hypothesis should be accepted. The present paper argues against pinning the failure of agreement-based reasoning on the models. Instead, the problem is that agreement is a reliable marker of confirmation only when the hypotheses under consideration are mutually exclusive. Since most cutting-edge questions in climate modeling require making distinctions between mutually consistent hypotheses, agreement across models is unlikely to help answer these questions. Because the problem here is agreement (and not the models), we should expect that there are other ways of using the models that are more informative and reliable.

Export/Citation: EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL
Social Networking:
Share |
Item Type: Preprint
Creators:
CreatorsEmailORCID
Dethier, Coreycorey.dethier@gmail.com0000-0002-1240-8391
Additional Information: Forthcoming in European Journal for Philosophy of Science.
Keywords: robustness; agreement; climate models; confirmation
Subjects: Specific Sciences > Climate Science and Meteorology
General Issues > Confirmation/Induction
Depositing User: Dr. Corey Dethier
Date Deposited: 29 Feb 2024 02:51
Last Modified: 29 Feb 2024 02:51
Item ID: 23143
Subjects: Specific Sciences > Climate Science and Meteorology
General Issues > Confirmation/Induction
Date: 16 May 2024
URI: https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/23143

Available Versions of this Item

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item