Big Data Biology: Between Eliminative Inferences and Exploratory Experiments

Recently, biologists have argued that data-driven biology fosters a new scientific methodology, namely, one that is irreducible to traditional methodologies of molecular biology defined as the discovery strategies elucidated by mechanistic philosophy. Here I show how data-driven studies can be included in the traditional mechanistic approach in two respects. On the one hand, some studies provide eliminative inferential procedures to prioritize and develop mechanistic hypotheses. On the other, different studies play an exploratory role in providing useful generalizations to complement the procedure of prioritization. Overall, this article aims to shed light on the structure of contemporary research in molecular biology.

[1]  Heather Douglas Reintroducing Prediction to Explanation , 2009, Philosophy of Science.

[2]  Mark I. McCarthy,et al.  Genome-Wide Association Studies of Obesity , 2014 .

[3]  Leland Gerson Neuberg,et al.  Bayes or Bust?-A Critical Examination of Bayesian Confirmation Theory. , 1994 .

[4]  Robert Weinberg,et al.  Point: Hypotheses first , 2010, Nature.

[5]  R Dulbecco,et al.  A turning point in cancer research: sequencing the human genome. , 1986, Science.

[6]  Benjamin J. Raphael,et al.  Identifying driver mutations in sequenced cancer genomes: computational approaches to enable precision medicine , 2014, Genome Medicine.

[7]  Elias Zintzaras,et al.  Genome-wide association studies: hypothesis-"free" or "engaged"? , 2009, Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine.

[8]  Fridolin Gross THE SUM OF THE PARTS: HEURISTIC STRATEGIES IN SYSTEMS BIOLOGY , 2013 .

[9]  A. Cambrosio,et al.  Too many numbers: Microarrays in clinical cancer research. , 2012, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[10]  K. Kinzler,et al.  Cancer Genome Landscapes , 2013, Science.

[11]  D. Kell,et al.  Here is the evidence, now what is the hypothesis? The complementary roles of inductive and hypothesis-driven science in the post-genomic era. , 2004, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[12]  Muin J Khoury,et al.  Genome-wide association studies in pharmacogenomics: untapped potential for translation , 2009, Genome Medicine.

[13]  C. Waters,et al.  The nature and context of exploratory experimentation: an introduction to three case studies of exploratory research. , 2007, History and philosophy of the life sciences.

[14]  J. Platt Strong Inference , 2007 .

[15]  M. McCarthy,et al.  Genome-wide association studies for complex traits: consensus, uncertainty and challenges , 2008, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[16]  Benjamin J. Raphael,et al.  Mutational landscape and significance across 12 major cancer types , 2013, Nature.

[17]  S. Gabriel,et al.  Pan-cancer patterns of somatic copy-number alteration , 2013, Nature Genetics.

[18]  J. Brookfield,et al.  Q&A: Promise and pitfalls of genome-wide association studies , 2010, BMC Biology.

[19]  Orkun S. Soyer,et al.  The roles of integration in molecular systems biology. , 2012, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[20]  Chris Sander,et al.  Emerging landscape of oncogenic signatures across human cancers , 2013, Nature Genetics.

[21]  Patrick Forber,et al.  Reconceiving Eliminative Inference* , 2011, Philosophy of Science.

[22]  Xinle Liang,et al.  Comparative analysis of somatic copy-number alterations across different human cancer types reveals two distinct classes of breakpoint hotspots. , 2012, Human molecular genetics.

[23]  S. Leonelli,et al.  Introduction: Making sense of data-driven research in the biological and biomedical sciences. , 2012, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[24]  ENCODEConsortium,et al.  An Integrated Encyclopedia of DNA Elements in the Human Genome , 2012, Nature.

[25]  T. Golub Counterpoint: Data first , 2010, Nature.

[26]  Data production leads,et al.  An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome , 2012 .

[27]  Hans-Jörg Rheinberger,et al.  Infra-Experimentality: From Traces to Data, from Data to Patterning Facts , 2011 .

[28]  Galit Shmueli,et al.  To Explain or To Predict? , 2010 .

[29]  David J Hunter,et al.  From Darwin's finches to canaries in the coal mine--mining the genome for new biology. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  Maureen A. O’Malley,et al.  Exploratory experimentation and scientific practice: metagenomics and the proteorhodopsin case. , 2007, History and philosophy of the life sciences.

[31]  Sandra D. Mitchell Pragmatic Laws , 1997, Philosophy of Science.

[32]  W. N. SHAW,et al.  The Advancement of Science , 1880, Science.

[33]  J. Earman,et al.  Bayes or Bust? A Critical Examination of Bayesian Confirmation Theory , 1994 .

[34]  Steven A. Roberts,et al.  Mutational heterogeneity in cancer and the search for new cancer-associated genes , 2013 .

[35]  Eli Upfal,et al.  Finding driver pathways in cancer: models and algorithms , 2011, Algorithms for Molecular Biology.

[36]  James Hawthorne Bayesian Induction Is Eliminative Induction , 1993 .

[37]  Bruce Alberts,et al.  The End of “Small Science”? , 2012, Science.

[38]  P. Machamer,et al.  Thinking about Mechanisms , 2000, Philosophy of Science.

[39]  Kelly A. Frazer,et al.  Linking disease associations with regulatory information in the , 2012 .

[40]  Friedrich Steinle,et al.  Entering New Fields: Exploratory Uses of Experimentation , 1997, Philosophy of Science.

[41]  Eurie L. Hong,et al.  Annotation of functional variation in personal genomes using RegulomeDB , 2012, Genome research.

[42]  E. Lander,et al.  Lessons from the Cancer Genome , 2013, Cell.

[43]  B. Strasser The Experimenter's Museum: GenBank, Natural History, and the Moral Economies of Biomedicine , 2011, Isis.

[44]  William Bechtel,et al.  Discovering Complexity: Decomposition and Localization as Strategies in Scientific Research , 2010 .

[45]  P. Germain,et al.  Junk or functional DNA? ENCODE and the function controversy , 2014 .

[46]  Neil R Smalheiser Informatics and hypothesis‐driven research , 2002, EMBO reports.

[47]  Matthew L. Freedman,et al.  Analysis of the 10q11 Cancer Risk Locus Implicates MSMB and NCOA4 in Human Prostate Tumorigenesis , 2010, PLoS genetics.

[48]  S. Batzoglou,et al.  Linking disease associations with regulatory information in the human genome , 2012, Genome research.

[49]  Mark D. Johnson,et al.  Functional genomic analysis of chromosomal aberrations in a compendium of 8000 cancer genomes , 2013, Genome research.

[50]  John D. Norton,et al.  Eliminative Induction as a Method of Discovery: How Einstein Discovered General Relativity , 1995 .

[51]  M. Marazita,et al.  Genome-wide Association Studies , 2012, Journal of dental research.

[52]  Galit Shmueli,et al.  To Explain or To Predict? , 2010, 1101.0891.

[53]  D. Hanahan,et al.  Hallmarks of Cancer: The Next Generation , 2011, Cell.

[54]  Giovanni Boniolo,et al.  On Molecular Mechanisms and Contexts of Physical Explanation , 2012, Biological Theory.