In’ or ‘as’ space?: a model of complexity, with philosophical, simulatory, and empirical ramifications
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A General Systems model based on ideas originating with the writings of Benedict de Spinoza is described, starting with its philosophical underpinnings and proceeding on to its relation to modern systems concepts, including attempts to simulate the relationships posed and measure real-world structures. Central to the idea is the notion that spatial extension may not have a prior existence but emerges only through an entropy maximization process in which information and energy exchange is balanced among some limited number of subsystems that in sum comprise any given functioning complex system. Related published empiricism concerning geographical/geological systems -the hypsometry of stream basins and overall internal zonation properties of earth structure -is briefly described; the former, especially, reveals a hierarchical pattern of potential energy relations that seems to fit well the organizational hypothesis. Possible applications of the model to genomic codon and medical imaging modeling are alluded to. A brief treatment of the relation of the model to basic properties of complex systems (connectivity, autonomy, emergence, etc.) is provided.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it