MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Grounding Concepts: an Empirical Basis for Arithmetical Knowledge - C.S. Jenkins

2010· article· en· W1505598217 on OpenAlexaff
James Robert Brown, J. Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Philosophical Quarterly · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy and History of Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArithmetic functionNaturalismEmpiricismRealismEpistemologyMental arithmeticA priori and a posterioriAnalytic philosophyAnalogical reasoningCognitive sciencePhilosophyMathematicsComputer sciencePsychologyContemporary philosophyDiscrete mathematicsAnalogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grounding Concepts and The Origin of Concepts are two new and important books. The first is by Carrie Jenkins, a philosopher of mathematics very much in the analytic tradition; the second is by Susan Carey, a psychologist who is well connected to philosophy. Both are deeply concerned with how we acquire our arithmetical concepts, and both are empiricist‐minded (perhaps naturalist‐minded is a better description of Carey). Yet their approaches are strikingly different. Jenkins aims to reconcile three conflicting beliefs: (i) our knowledge of arithmetic is a priori; (ii) the facts of arithmetic are objectively true (realism, which she characterizes as mathematics being independent of our mental lives); (iii) sensory input is the only source of knowledge. Her solution, in brief, is to say that we acquire arithmetic concepts through empirical experience, but we learn mathematical truths through the analysis of those concepts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Philosophical QuarterlySame topicPhilosophy and History of ScienceFrench-language works237,207