• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
SRI logo
  • About
    • Press room
    • Our history
  • Expertise
    • Advanced imaging systems
    • Artificial intelligence
    • Biomedical R&D services
    • Biomedical sciences
    • Computer vision
    • Cyber & formal methods
    • Education and learning
    • Innovation strategy and policy
    • National security
    • Ocean & space
    • Quantum
    • Robotics, sensors & devices
    • Speech & natural language
    • Video test & measurement
  • Ventures
  • NSIC
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • 日本支社
Search
Close
Artificial intelligence publications June 1, 1981

Random Sample Consensus: A Paradigm for Model Fitting with Applications to Image Analysis and Automated Cartography

Citation

Copy to clipboard


Fischler, M. A., & Bolles, R. C. (1981). Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Communications of the ACM, 24(6), 381-395.

Introduction

It may seem odd for two cognitive scientists, each with little specific expertise in social psychology, to present a chapter that focuses on social cognition. Indeed, our past work may seem much more in the realm of scientific reasoning than in that of social reasoning. But one question that we have been asking, both of ourselves and of our colleagues, is, “What is the difference between ‘scientific reasoning’ and plain old ‘reasoning’?” Generally, people hem and haw when confronted with this question, then speak of the latter as if it were social reasoning—and quite often, they mention socially based ruminations that involve suboptimal decisions, faulty heuristics, and inappropriately biased values, goals, and the like (see Gigerenzer, 1991; Tversky & Kahneman, 1974, and many others). Useful follow-up questions to such respondents include, “Well, is the difference between these two sorts of reasoning qualitative or quantitative?” Put another way (as many—including Einstein, 1950,—seem to have occasionally wondered), “Is scientific reasoning
just (a) more likely to employ formal tools (like deduction or mathematics) and/or (b) more likely to involve the vigilant search for disconfirmation—something that just plain folks (Lave, 1988, p. 4) do, but less frequently?

Put rather bluntly, we have not been able to reject the hypothesis that the word “scientific” in “scientific reasoning” is superfluous. In an era of specialization, we realize that it is a bit out of fashion to undifferentiate reasoning (although one can argue that interdisciplinary cognitive science itself similarly bucks the trend); still, we are more struck by how much of the everyday is found in scientific reasoning (and vice versa) than by how unique scientific reasoning is. Thus, we believe that the principles of reasoning that have been seen primarily as characterizing scientific reasoning can equally well be viewed as central to social reasoning .1
Bifurcating the set of reasoning processes into the social and the scientific is a bit like bifurcating a deity and still considering the encompassing religion to be monotheistic. In essence, adding either the modifier “social” or “scientific” seems unnecessary, unless one speaks about the domain being reasoned about (discussed later).

↓ Download

Share this
Career call to action image

Work with us

Search jobs

How can we help?

Once you hit send…

We’ll match your inquiry to the person who can best help you.

Expect a response within 48 hours.

Our work

Case studies

Publications

Timeline of innovation

Areas of expertise

Institute

Leadership

Press room

Media inquiries

Compliance

Careers

Job listings

Contact

SRI Ventures

Our locations

Headquarters

333 Ravenswood Ave
Menlo Park, CA 94025 USA

+1 (650) 859-2000

Subscribe to our newsletter


日本支社
SRI International
  • Contact us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies
  • DMCA
  • Copyright © 2023 SRI International
Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage {vendor_count} vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}