Abduction 101: Reasoning processes to aid discovery
Open accessIntegrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Pawelczyk et al. make use of an autoencoder architecture for a pretrained classifier performing counterfactual search in the nearest neighbor style.
“Pawelczyk et al. make use of an autoencoder architecture for a pretrained classifier performing counterfactual search in the nearest neighbor style [151].”
From A Survey of Contrastive and Counterfactual Explanation Generation Methods for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as [151]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 45 · Cited by 101
- Authors
- Folger, R., & Stein, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Central Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Folger, Robert
- ORCID
- Folger, Robert
- Venue
- Human Resource Management Review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-06
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 306-315
- ISSN
- 1053-4822 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2507142041
- Cited by
- 101
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 6.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Human Resource Management Review (publishedVersion)
- Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Business Strategies and Management Research
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Business and Management Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
- Keywords
- abduction, abductive reasoning, management research, theory development, explanatory hypotheses, deduction, induction, contrastive reasoning, causal explanation, history of management research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
