MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791813432 · doi:10.21494/iste.op.2018.0242

Epistemological Contextualism from a Logical Point of View

2018· article· fr· W2791813432 on OpenAlexaff
Yves Bouchard

Bibliographic record

VenueModélisation et utilisation du contexte · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContextualismEpistemologyPoint (geometry)PhilosophyPsychologyLinguisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce papier présente un cadre logique capable d'exprimer un contextualisme épistémologique.Le contextualisme épistémologique repose sur la possibilité d'une interprétation indexicale des connaissances de l'opérateur, selon laquelle les conditions de vérité des attributions des connaissances manifeste une variabilité contextuelle d'une telle manière que les connaissances dans un contexte n'implique pas de connaissances dans d'autres contextes.Au moyen d'une notion de contexte épistémique définie sur la base de la notion de contexte développée par McCarthy et Buvac en Intelligence Artificielle, le papier montre comment une interprétation indexicale des connaissances de l'opérateur peut être modélisée formellement à travers un système de déduction naturellequi permet le raisonnement classique parmi des contextes gouvernés par différents concepts de connaissance.ABSTRACT.This paper aims at presenting a logical framework capable of expressing epistemological contextualism.Epistemological contextualism relies upon the possibility of an indexical interpretation of the knowledge operator, according to which the truth conditions of knowledge attributions exhibit a contextual variability in such a way that knowledge in one context does not entail knowledge in every context.By means of a notion of epistemic context defined on the basis of the notion of context developed by McCarthy and Buvač in artificial intelligence, I show how an indexical interpretation of the knowledge operator can be formally modeled through a natural deduction system that enables classical reasoning among contexts governed by different concepts of knowledge. MOTS-CLÉS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.026
Scholarly communication0.0100.013
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModélisation et utilisation du contexteSame topicSemantic Web and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207