Abstract
Epistemological issues in engineering knowledge have traditionally played a central role in the debate over the assessment of the philosophy of engineering as a disciplinary field. However, only few works have explicitly focused on experimental methodology and attempted to systematically compare the traditional experimental method of the natural sciences to the kind of experimentation carried out in engineering research. In this paper, by investigating some areas of computer engineering, and in particular autonomous robotics, I claim that traditional experimentation cannot be always applied as such to computer engineering and that the notion of explorative experiment is a good candidate to be considered. Explorative experiments are a form of investigation of novel ideas or techniques without the typical constraints of rigorous experimental methodologies. They are driven by the desire of investigating the realm of possibilities pertaining to the functioning of a technical artefact and its interaction with the environment in the absence of a proper theory or theoretical background.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amigoni, F., Schiaffonati, V., & Verdicchio, M. (2014). Good experimental methodologies for autonomous robotics: From theory to practice. In F. Amigoni & V. Schiaffonati (Eds.), Methods and experimental techniques in computer engineering, Springer Briefs in Applied Sciences and Technology (pp. 37–53). Cham: Springer.
Ansell, C. (2012). What is a “democratic experiment”? Contemporary Pragmatism, 9(2), 159–180.
Barni, M., Perez-Gonzalez, F., Comesana, P., & Bartoli, G. (2007). Putting reproducible signal processing into practice: A case study in watermarking. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on acoustics speech and signal processing.
Bensaude-Vincent, B., Loeve, S., Nordmann, A., & Schwarz, A. (2011). Matters of interest. The object of research in science and technoscience. Journal of General Philosophy of Science, 43, 365–383.
Bonsignorio, F., & del Pobil, A. (2015). Special issue on replicable and measurable robotics research. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 22(3), 32–154.
Bonsignorio, F., Hallam, J., & del Pobil, A. (2015). Special interest group on good experimental methodologies. http://www.heronrobots.com/EuronGEMSig/gem-sig-events. Accessed Sept 2016.
Boon, M. (2012). Scientific concepts in the engineering sciences: Epistemic tools for creating and intervening with phenomena. In U. Feest & F. Steinle (Eds.), Scientific concepts and investigative practice (pp. 219–243). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Burian, R. M. (1997). Exploratory experimentation and the role of histochemical techniques in the work of Jean Brachet, 1938–1952. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 19, 27–45.
Burian, R. M. (2007). On MicroRNA and the need for exploratory experimentation in post-genomic molecular biology. History and Philosophy of Life Sciences, 29(3), 285–311.
Chu, V., McMahon, I., Riano, L., McDonald, C., He, Q., Martinez Perez-Tejada, J., Arrigo, M., Fitter, N., Nappo, J., Darrell, T., & Kuchenbecker, U. (2013). Using robotic exploratory procedures to learn the meaning of haptic adjectives. Proceedings of ICRA, 3048–3055.
Daniel, C., Neumann, G., & Peters, J. (2012). Learning concurrent motor skills in versatile solution spaces. Proceedings of IROS, 3591–3597.
Deisenroth, M., Englert, P., Peters, J., & Fox, D. (2014). Multi-task policy search for robotics. Proceedings of ICRA, 3876–3881.
Denning, P. J. (1980). What is experimental computer science. Communications of the ACM, 23(10), 543–544.
Denning, P. J. (2005). Is computer science science? Communications of the ACM, 48(4), 27–31.
Denning, P. J., & Freeman, P. (2009). Computing’s paradigm. Communications of the ACM, 52(12), 28–30.
Fasola, J., & Mataric, M. (2013). Using semantic fields to model dynamic spatial relations in a robot architecture for natural language instruction of service robots. Proceedings of IROS, 143–150.
Feitelson, D. G. (2006). Experimental computer science: The need for a cultural change. Unpublished manuscript. http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~feit/papers/exp05.pdf. Accessed Oct 2016.
Feldman, J. A., & Sutherland, W. R. (1979). Rejuvenating experimental computer science. Communications of the ACM, 22(9), 497–502.
Franklin, L. R. (2005). Exploratory experiments. Philosophy of Science, 72, 888–899.
Franssen, M., Vermaas, P. E., Kroes, P., & Meijers, A. W. M. (2016). Philosophy of technology after the empirical turn. Cham: Springer.
Freeman, P. (2008). Back to experimentation. Communications of the ACM, 51(1), 21–22.
Gemici, M., & Saxena, A. (2014). Learning haptic representation for manipulating deformable food objects. Proceedings of IROS, 638–645.
Grollman, D., & Billard, A. (2011). Donut as I do: Learning from failed demonstrations. Proceedings of ICRA, 3804–3809.
Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hansson, S. O. (2016). Experiments: Why and how? Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(3), 613–632.
Juristo, N., & Gomez, O. (2012). Replication of software engineering experiments. In B. Mayer & M. Nordio (Eds.), Empirical software engineering and verication (pp. 60–88). Berlin: Springer.
Juristo, N., & Moreno, A. M. (2011). Basics of software engineering experimentation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Kit, E. (1999). Software testing in the real world. Harlow: Addison-Wesley.
Kroes, P. (2016). Experiments on socio-technical systems: The problem of control. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(3), 633–645.
McCracken, D. D., Denning, P. J., & Brandin, D. H. (1979). An ACM executive committee position on the crisis in experimental computer science. Communications of the ACM, 22(9), 503–504.
Michelfelder, D. P., McCarthy, N., & Goldberg, D. E. (Eds.). (2013). Philosophy and engineering. Reflections on practice, principles, and process. Dordrecht: Springer.
Morrison, C. T., & Snodgrass, R. T. (2011). Computer science can use more science. Communications of the ACM, 54(6), 36–38.
Newell, A., & Simon, H. (1976). Computer science as empirical inquiry: Symbols and search. Communications of the ACM, 19(3), 113–126.
Nordmann, A. (2010). Science in the context of technology. In M. Carrier & A. Nordmann (Eds.), Science in the context of application. Boston studies in the philosophy of science (pp. 467–482). Dordrecht: Springer.
Nordmann, A. (2016). Changing perspectives: The technological turn in the philosophies of science and technology. In M. Frassen, P. E. Vermaas, P. Kroes, & A. W. Meijers (Eds.), Philosophy of technology after the empirical turn (pp. 107–125). Cham: Springer.
Radder, H. (2009). The philosophy of scientific experimentation: A review. Automated Experimentation, 1(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1759-4499-1-2.
Schiaffonati, V. (2016). Stretching the traditional notion of experiment in computing: Explorative experiments. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(3), 647–665.
Schwabe, G., & Krcmar, H. (2000). Piloting socio-technical innovation. In Proceedings of the European conference on information systems, Paper 27.
Small, A. W. (1921). The future of sociology. Publications of the American Sociological Society, 15, 174–193.
Snir, M. (2011). Computer and information science and engineering: One discipline, many specialties. Communications of the ACM, 54(3), 38–43.
Staples, M. (2014). Critical rationalism and engineering: Ontology. Synthese, 191(10), 2255–2279.
Staples, M. (2015). Critical rationalism and engineering: Methodology. Synthese, 192(1), 337–362.
Steinle, F. (1997). Entering new fields: Exploratory uses of experimentation. Philosophy of Science, 64, S65–S67.
Tedre, M. (2011). Computing as a science: A survey of computing viewpoints. Minds and Machines, 21, 361–387.
Tedre, M. (2015). The science of computing. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group.
Thobbi, A., Gu, Y., & Sheng, W. (2011). Using human motion estimation for human-robot cooperative manipulation. Proceedings of IROS, 2873–2878.
Tichy, W. F. (1998). Should computer scientists experiment more? Computer, 31(5), 32–40.
van de Poel, I. (2010). Philosophy and engineering: Setting the stage. In I. van de Poel & D. E. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda (pp. 1–11). Dordrecht: Springer.
Van de Poel, I. (forthcoming). Society as a laboratory to experiment with new technologies. In E. Stokes, D. Bowman, & A. Rip (Eds.), Embedding and governing new technologies. Singapore: Pan Stanford Publishing.
van de Poel, I., & Goldberg, D. E. (Eds.). (2010). Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda. Dordrecht: Springer.
Vermaas, P., Kroes, P., van de Poel, I., Franssen, M., & Houkes, W. (2011). A philosophy of technology. From technical artefacts to sociotechnical systems. San Rafael: Morgan & Claypool.
Vincenti, W. G. (1990). What engineers know and how they know it. Baltimore/London: John Hopkins University Press.
Waters, C. K. (2007). The nature and context of exploratory experimentation. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 19, 275–284.
Zelkowitz, M. V., & Wallace, D. R. (1997). Experimental validation in software engineering. Information and Software Technology, 39(11), 735–743.
Zelkowitz, M. V., & Wallace, D. R. (1998). Experimental models for validating technology. Computer, 31(5), 23–31.
Zwart, S. D., & de Vries, M. J. (2016). Methodological classification of innovative engineering projects. In M. Franssen, P. E. Vermaas, P. Kroes, & A. W. M. Meijers (Eds.), Philosophy of technology after the empirical turn (pp. 219–248). Cham: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schiaffonati, V. (2018). Philosophy of Engineering and the Quest for a Novel Notion of Experimentation. In: Fritzsche, A., Oks, S. (eds) The Future of Engineering. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 31. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91029-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91029-1_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91028-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91029-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)