  We take the point of view that building a one-way bridge from experimental
data to mathematical models instead of the other way around avoids running into
controversies resulting from attaching meaning to the symbols used in the
latter. In particular, we show that adopting this view offers new perspectives
for constructing mathematical models for and interpreting the results of
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments. We first prove new Bell-type
inequalities constraining the values of the four correlations obtained by
performing Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments under four different
conditions. The proof is ``model-free'' in the sense that it does not refer to
any mathematical model that one imagines to have produced the data. The
constraints only depend on the number of quadruples obtained by reshuffling the
data in the four data sets without changing the values of the correlations.
These new inequalities reduce to model-free versions of the well-known
Bell-type inequalities if the maximum fraction of quadruples is equal to one.
Being model-free, a violation of the latter by experimental data implies that
not all the data in the four data sets can be reshuffled to form quadruples.
Furthermore, being model-free inequalities, a violation of the latter by
experimental data only implies that any mathematical model assumed to produce
this data does not apply. Starting from the data obtained by performing
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments, we construct instead of postulate
mathematical models that describe the main features of these data. The
mathematical framework of plausible reasoning is applied to reproducible and
robust data, yielding without using any concept of quantum theory, the
expression of the correlation for a system of two spin-1/2 objects in the
singlet state. (truncated here)
