MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Newton’s Scientific Method

2020· book-chapter· en· W3083883087 on OpenAlexaff
William L. Harper

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One central feature of Newton’s methodology is the use of theory-mediated measurements to make empirical phenomena carry information about causal dependencies. Accurate measurements of theoretical parameters by phenomena is a conception of empirical success that goes beyond the restriction of empirical success to accurate prediction of phenomena in the hypothetico-deductive model of scientific inference. This is informed by Newton’s account of provisional acceptance of propositions gathered from phenomena in his Fourth Rule of reasoning. Another feature is to follow up the discovery of forces of nature by applying those forces to additional phenomena. This is illustrated by the sequence of refinements of the model for solar system motions as more and more dependencies corresponding to Newtonian interactions were taken into account. Given that his theory would recover these Newtonian causal dependencies, Einstein’s Mercury perihelion result made his theory of gravity more empirically successful than Newton’s.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.130 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicHistorical Philosophy and ScienceFrench-language works237,207