MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553946196 · doi:10.4000/ress.3589

Aspects of scientific explanation in Auguste Comte

2016· article· fr· W2553946196 on OpenAlex
Vincent Guillin

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue européenne des sciences sociales · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Institutions
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnificationPositivismEpistemologySet (abstract data type)SociologyPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the received view, the positivist conception of explanation primarily consists in the idea that a good explanation should aim at promoting the unification and understanding of phenomena through the discovery of their empirical laws. Although Auguste Comte undoubtedly subscribed to such a view, his positions on the matter were somewhat more complex. In my paper, I propose an outline of his ideas with respect to explanation that draws particular attention to the limits he set to it, to the causal considerations he made room for and to the ways his general explanatory framework applied to the study of social phenomena.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.010
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.113 · 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