MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On Abstract Sciences: From Data, Information, Knowledge to Intelligence Sciences

2022· article· en· W4366674532 on OpenAlex

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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Computing and Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionComputer scienceCognitive scienceInformation scienceComprehensionHuman scienceHuman intelligenceData scienceArtificial intelligencePsychologySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of abstract sciences as a counterpart of classic concrete sciences is presented in this work. The framework of abstract sciences encompasses data, information, knowledge, and intelligence sciences from the bottom up. It is found that intelligence is the ultimate level of cognitive objects generated in human brains aggregated from data (sensory), information (cognition), and knowledge (comprehension). However, there is a lack of rigorous studies and coherent theories towards the theoretical framework of abstract sciences as the counterpart of classical concrete sciences. This paper explores the cognitive and mathematical models of abstract mental objects in the brain. The taxonomy and cognitive foundations of them are explored. A set of mathematical models of data, information, knowledge, and intelligence is formally created in intelligent mathematics. Based on the cognitive and mathematical models of the cognitive objects, formal properties and relationship of contemporary data, information, knowledge, and intelligence sciences are rigorously explained.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCognitive Computing and NetworksFrench-language works237,207