Coveney, PV;
Highfield, RR;
(2021)
When we can trust computers (and when we can't).
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
, 379
(2197)
, Article 20200067. 10.1098/rsta.2020.0067.
Preview |
Text
rsta.2020.0067.pdf - Published Version Download (360kB) | Preview |
Abstract
With the relentless rise of computer power, there is a widespread expectation that computers can solve the most pressing problems of science, and even more besides. We explore the limits of computational modelling and conclude that, in the domains of science and engineering which are relatively simple and firmly grounded in theory, these methods are indeed powerful. Even so, the availability of code, data and documentation, along with a range of techniques for validation, verification and uncertainty quantification, are essential for building trust in computer-generated findings. When it comes to complex systems in domains of science that are less firmly grounded in theory, notably biology and medicine, to say nothing of the social sciences and humanities, computers can create the illusion of objectivity, not least because the rise of big data and machine-learning pose new challenges to reproducibility, while lacking true explanatory power. We also discuss important aspects of the natural world which cannot be solved by digital means. In the long term, renewed emphasis on analogue methods will be necessary to temper the excessive faith currently placed in digital computation. This article is part of the theme issue 'Reliability and reproducibility in computational science: implementing verification, validation and uncertainty quantification in silico'.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | When we can trust computers (and when we can't) |
| Location: | England |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1098/rsta.2020.0067 |
| Publisher version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2020.0067 |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | With the relentless rise of computer power, there is a widespread expectation that computers can solve the most pressing problems of science, and even more besides. We explore the limits of computational modelling and conclude that, in the domains of science and engineering which are relatively simple and firmly grounded in theory, these methods are indeed powerful. Even so, the availability of code, data and documentation, along with a range of techniques for validation, verification and uncertainty quantification, are essential for building trust in computer-generated findings. When it comes to complex systems in domains of science that are less firmly grounded in theory, notably biology and medicine, to say nothing of the social sciences and humanities, computers can create the illusion of objectivity, not least because the rise of big data and machine-learning pose new challenges to reproducibility, while lacking true explanatory power. We also discuss important aspects of the natural world which cannot be solved by digital means. In the long term, renewed emphasis on analogue methods will be necessary to temper the excessive faith currently placed in digital computation. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Reliability and reproducibility in computational science: implementing verification, validation and uncertainty quantification in silico’. |
| Keywords: | artificial intelligence, big data, machine learning, uncertainty quantification, validation, verification |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Maths and Physical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Maths and Physical Sciences > Dept of Chemistry |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10126162 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
