MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Russell e Frege sobre a Lógica das Funções

2022· article· pt· W4312275632 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard Linsky

Bibliographic record

VenueRematec · 2022
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicPhilosophy and Theoretical Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neste artigo eu comparo a teoria das funções Matemáticas de Russell, às “funções descritivas” do Principia Mathematica ∗30, com a conhecida explicação de Frege das funções como entidades “insaturadas”. Russell analisa termos funcionais com funções proposicionais e a teoria de descrições definidas. Este é o principal papel técnico da teoria das descrições em Filosofia Matemática. No The Principles of Mathematics e alguns escritos inéditos anteriores a 1905, Russell ofereceu críticas explícitas ao relato de funções de Frege. Consequentemente, a teoria das descrições em “On Denoting” pode ser vista como uma parte crucial da maior redução logicista da Matemática de Russell, bem como uma excursão à teoria da referência.

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)0.004
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.017
Scholarly communication0.0040.012
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRematecSame topicPhilosophy and Theoretical ScienceFrench-language works237,207