The reliability of randomized algorithms

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Recently, certain philosophers of mathematics (Fallis [1997]; Womack and Farach [1997]) have argued that there are no epistemic considerations that should stop mathematicians from using probabilistic methods to establish that mathematical propositions are true. However, mathematicians clearly should not use methods that are unreliable. Unfortunately, due to the fact that randomized algorithms are not really random in practice, there is reason to doubt their reliability. In this paper, I analyze the prospects for establishing that randomized algorithms are reliable. I end by arguing that it would be inconsistent for mathematicians to suspend judgement on the truth of mathematical propositions on the basis of worries about the reliability of randomized algorithms.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)255-271
Number of pages17
JournalBritish Journal for the Philosophy of Science
Volume51
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jun 2000

Fingerprint

Mathematicians
Mathematics
Philosopher

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • History
  • History and Philosophy of Science
  • Philosophy

Cite this

The reliability of randomized algorithms. / Fallis, Don T.

In: British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 51, No. 2, 06.2000, p. 255-271.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5fb83ab74fc64d30a40315136fc14e17,
title = "The reliability of randomized algorithms",
abstract = "Recently, certain philosophers of mathematics (Fallis [1997]; Womack and Farach [1997]) have argued that there are no epistemic considerations that should stop mathematicians from using probabilistic methods to establish that mathematical propositions are true. However, mathematicians clearly should not use methods that are unreliable. Unfortunately, due to the fact that randomized algorithms are not really random in practice, there is reason to doubt their reliability. In this paper, I analyze the prospects for establishing that randomized algorithms are reliable. I end by arguing that it would be inconsistent for mathematicians to suspend judgement on the truth of mathematical propositions on the basis of worries about the reliability of randomized algorithms.",
author = "Fallis, {Don T}",
year = "2000",
month = "6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "51",
pages = "255--271",
journal = "British Journal for the Philosophy of Science",
issn = "0007-0882",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The reliability of randomized algorithms

AU - Fallis, Don T

PY - 2000/6

Y1 - 2000/6

N2 - Recently, certain philosophers of mathematics (Fallis [1997]; Womack and Farach [1997]) have argued that there are no epistemic considerations that should stop mathematicians from using probabilistic methods to establish that mathematical propositions are true. However, mathematicians clearly should not use methods that are unreliable. Unfortunately, due to the fact that randomized algorithms are not really random in practice, there is reason to doubt their reliability. In this paper, I analyze the prospects for establishing that randomized algorithms are reliable. I end by arguing that it would be inconsistent for mathematicians to suspend judgement on the truth of mathematical propositions on the basis of worries about the reliability of randomized algorithms.

AB - Recently, certain philosophers of mathematics (Fallis [1997]; Womack and Farach [1997]) have argued that there are no epistemic considerations that should stop mathematicians from using probabilistic methods to establish that mathematical propositions are true. However, mathematicians clearly should not use methods that are unreliable. Unfortunately, due to the fact that randomized algorithms are not really random in practice, there is reason to doubt their reliability. In this paper, I analyze the prospects for establishing that randomized algorithms are reliable. I end by arguing that it would be inconsistent for mathematicians to suspend judgement on the truth of mathematical propositions on the basis of worries about the reliability of randomized algorithms.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0039331126&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0039331126&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0039331126

VL - 51

SP - 255

EP - 271

JO - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science

JF - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science

SN - 0007-0882

IS - 2

ER -