Notice bibliographique
Résumé
June 25, 2012 (9:21 pm) E:\CPBR\RUSSJOUR\TYPE3201\russell 32,1 060 red.wpd 1 Jourdain’s principal historical writings are gathered together in Selected Essays on the History of Set Theory and Logics (1906–1918), ed. I. Grattan-Guinness (Bologna: clueb, 1991) and his introduction to G. Cantor, Contributions to the Founding of the Theory of TransWnite Numbers, trans. and ed. Jourdain (La Salle, Ill.: Open Court, 1915; repr. New York: Dover, 1955). 2 I. Grattan-Guinness, Dear Russellz—zDear Jourdain: a Commentary on Russelly’s Logic, Based on His Correspondence with Philip Jourdain (London: Duckworth; New York: Columbia U. P., 1977); hereafter “RJy”. russell: the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies n.s. 32 (summer 2012): 69–74 The Bertrand Russell Research Centre, McMaster U. issn 0036-01631; online 1913-8032 ocuments JOURDAIN, RUSSELL AND THE AXIOM OF CHOICE: A NEW DOCUMENT I. Grattan-Guinness Middlesex U. Business School Hendon, London nw4 4bt, uk Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science, l.s.e. London wc2a 2ae, uk ivor2@mdx.ac.uk i.wcareer P hilip Edward Bertrand Jourdain (1879–1919) went up to Trinity College Cambridge in 1899 with a scholarship in mathematics. Two years later he attended a special College course in mathematical logic oTered by Bertrand Russell, the Wrst of its kind ever taught in a British university. This contact with Russell was of major consequence for his intellectual career, for he focused upon set theory and its history, and also on the histories of mathematical analysis and of logic, and aspects of the history and philosophy of mechanics and of science.1 He corresponded at length with Russell until his death in 1919; the exchange forms the core of my book on their relationship.2 From his youth Jourdain suTered from a creeping paralysis called “Friedreich ’s ataxia”. It prevented him from taking the Part 2 Tripos; thus he did not graduate as a Wrangler and so could not compete for a fellowship at Trinity. So he made his living from a few scholarships and from freelance writing as an June 25, 2012 (9:21 pm) E:\CPBR\RUSSJOUR\TYPE3201\russell 32,1 060 red.wpd 70 i. grattan-guinness 3 E. Zermelo, “Beweis, dass jede Menge wohlgeordnet werden kann”, Mathematische Annalen 59 (1904): 514–16. 4 See especially H. Rubin and J.yE Rubin, Equivalents of the Axiom of Choice, 2nd ed. (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1985). 5 The history of this/these axioms has been charted in much detail. See especially J. Cassinet and M. Guillemot, “L’axiome du choix dans les mathématiques de Cauchy (1821) à Gödel (1940)”, 2 vols. (U. of Toulouse double docteur d’état des sciences, 1983); F.yA. MedvedeT, Rannyaya istoriya aksiomi vibora (Moscow: Nauka, 1982); and G.yH. Moore, Zermelo’s Axiom of Choice … (New York: Springer, 1982). RJ discusses the axioms in the contexts of the correspondence. independent scholar. In particular, the American house The Open Court Publishing Company employed him, especially from 1912 on their principal journal The Monist, commissioning papers (and also some books) from colleagues, in particular Russell. He seems to have served as its general editor soon after the death in February 1919 of its founder editor, Paul Carus, but he died himself early in October. Those last months form the time-frame of this paper. 2.wobsession Jourdain’s principal research interest in the foundations of mathematics came to focus upon the denumerable “axiom of choice” in set theory and mathematics , as Ernst Zermelo named it a few years after introducing it in 1904.3 Take an inWnite ensemble of non-empty and pairwise disjoint sets and choose a member from each set in independent actions; then the axiom asserts that the collection of chosen members can always be regarded as a genuine set. But this manner of forming a set roused considerable doubts and opposition among many (though not all) set-theorists and logicians. Some of them rejected the axiom altogether; others tried to reprove theorems that used the axiom by proofs that avoided it; several sought hopefully more congenial assumptions that were logically equivalent to the axiom, and eventually many came to light.4 Logicists such...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,011 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,013 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,008 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,018 | 0,006 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».