Bibliographic record
Abstract
MARIO BUNGE, CATEDRATICO DE LA UNIVERSIDAD MCGILL, DE MONTREAL, CANADA, DICTO LA CONFERENCIA 25 SIGLOS DE TEORIA CUANTICA. DE PITAGORAS A NOSOSTROS Y DEL POSITIVISMO AL REALISMO, EN EL AUDITORIO ALEJANDRA JAIDAR DEL INSTITUTO DE FISICA. EL INVESTIGADOR HABLO DE LA HISTORIA DE LA MECANICA CUANTICA Y DE LA IMPORTANCIA QUE TIENE NO SOLO EN LA FISICA Y LA QUIMICA, SINO EN EL PENSAMIENTO Y LOS ADELANTOS TECNOLOGICOS. HA SIDO EL MOTOR DE CRECIMIENTO DE LA CIENCIA DEL SIGLO XX. LA TEORIA CUANTICA NO ES TAN JOVEN COMO SE CREE; NO COMENZO HACE CIEN ANOS, SINO EN EL SIGLO VI ANTES DE NUESTRA ERA, EN LA ANTIGUA GRECIA, CUANDO PITAGORAS, ESTUDIANDO LA FISICA DE LA MUSICA, DESCUBRIO QUE LA CUERDA DE UN ARPA PUEDE VIBRAR SOLAMENTE EN FRECUENCIAS QUE SON MULTIPLOS ENTEROS DE UNA LINEA ARMONICA FUNDAMENTAL. EL RECONOCIDO FISICO Y FILOSOFO RECORDO, ASIMISMO, QUE LA FISICA CUANTICA MODERNA NACIO CASI AL MISMO TIEMPO QUE EL POSITIVISMO LOGICO, FILOSOFIA QUE A DIFERENCIA DE OTRAS DE LA EPOCA --COMO EL INTUICIONISMO, EL NEOKANTISMO, EL NEOHEGELIANISMO, LA FENOMENOLOGIA, EL EXISTENCIALISMO Y EL MATERIALISMO DIALECTICO-- FUE CONSIDERADA MAS AVANZADA POR PROCLAMARSE CIENTIFICA, CONTINUAR LA TRADICION ANTIESPECULATIVA DEL EMPIRISMO CLASICO, EXIGIR PRECISION CONCEPTUAL Y, EN PARTICULAR, POR ADOPTAR LOGICA MATEMATICA RECHAZADA POR TODA LAS ESCUELAS RIVALES. ACTUALMENTE, LA FISICA CUANTICA SIGUE DANDO SORPRESAS Y CONTINUA PLANTEANDO PROBLEMAS FILOSOFICOS.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".