MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319833232 · doi:10.1002/sres.2931

Relational interpretation of quantum mechanics and Alexander Bogdanov's worldview

2023· article· en· W4319833232 on OpenAlexaff
Carlo Rovelli

Bibliographic record

VenueSystems Research and Behavioral Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Science, and History
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistemologyFormalism (music)PhilosophySubjectivityConfusionInterpretations of quantum mechanicsInterpretation (philosophy)Theoretical physicsCLARITYQuantumPhysicsQuantum mechanicsLiteraturePsychologyQuantum dynamicsLinguisticsPsychoanalysisChemistryArtQuantum process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There is a surprising parallel between the conceptual step taken by the theoretical physicists who discovered quantum mechanics in the 1920s and the philosophical work of Alexander Bogdanov. Both were under the direct cultural influence of the ideas of Ernst Mach. Even more surprisingly, there are aspects of the current debate on the physical interpretation of the quantum formalism that closely mirror the Lenin‐Bogdanov debate, in particular on the confusion between subjectivity and relationality. It seems to me that the ideas of Alexander Bogdanov can still bring clarity and be fertile today when applied to open issues in the foundations of physics.

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)0.004
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.021
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.283
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.106 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystems Research and Behavioral ScienceSame topicPhilosophy, Science, and HistoryFrench-language works237,207