MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366809564 · doi:10.1353/rss.2013.0002

Russell’s Notes for “Meinong’s Theory of Complexes and Assumptions”

2013· article· en· W4366809564 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bernard Linsky

Bibliographic record

VenueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Science, and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProblem of universalsPropositionPhilosophyEpistemologyArgument (complex analysis)Chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents fifteen pages of notes and marginal comments from Russell’s study of Meinong’s Ueber Annahmen and two other works in preparation for his 1904 article “Meinong’s Theory of Complexes and Assumptions”. The notes include an early appearance of the argument for the existence of universals that Russell later used in Chapter 9 of The Problems of Philosophy. The main focus of the notes is on Meinong’s notion of “objective” and the contrast with Russell’s notion of proposition, with non-existents such as “the round square” barely mentioned.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.015
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.007
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussell the Journal of Bertrand Russell StudiesSame topicPhilosophy, Science, and HistoryFrench-language works237,207