MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057791462 · doi:10.7202/008937ar

Poincaré et le principe d’induction

2004· article· fr· W2057791462 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jacqueline Boniface

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMathematics
TopicHistory and Theory of Mathematics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le principe d’induction est lié à la définition des nombres entiers d’une façon à la fois essentielle et sujette à controverse. Fonde-t-il ces nombres, ou bien trouve-t-il en eux son fondement ? Son statut lui-même peut être conçu de diverses manières. Est-il donné par l’expérience, par l’intuition, par la logique, par convention ? Ces questions furent l’objet d’une âpre discussion, autour des années 1905-1906, dans le cadre plus large d’un débat sur les fondements des mathématiques qui opposa Poincaré aux logicistes (en particulier Russell et Couturat) et aux « axiomatistes » (en particulier Peano et Hilbert). Nous proposons dans cet article de faire le point sur les termes et les enjeux de cette discussion. Nous montrerons en outre qu’elle fut l’occasion d’une redéfinition de l’analytique et, par suite, des frontières de la logique.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.776
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.141 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophiquesSame topicHistory and Theory of MathematicsFrench-language works237,207