数据景观上的科学网络:问题难度、认知成功和融合。

IF 1.3 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Patrick Grim, Daniel J Singer, Steven Fisher, Aaron Bramson, William J Berger, Christopher Reade, Carissa Flocken, Adam Sales
{"title":"数据景观上的科学网络:问题难度、认知成功和融合。","authors":"Patrick Grim,&nbsp;Daniel J Singer,&nbsp;Steven Fisher,&nbsp;Aaron Bramson,&nbsp;William J Berger,&nbsp;Christopher Reade,&nbsp;Carissa Flocken,&nbsp;Adam Sales","doi":"10.1017/epi.2013.36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A scientific community can be modeled as a collection of epistemic agents attempting to answer questions, in part by communicating about their hypotheses and results. We can treat the pathways of scientific communication as a network. When we do, it becomes clear that the interaction between the structure of the network and the nature of the question under investigation affects epistemic desiderata, including accuracy and speed to community consensus. Here we build on previous work, both our own and others', in order to get a firmer grasp on precisely which features of scientific communities interact with which features of scientific questions in order to influence epistemic outcomes. Here we introduce a measure on the landscape meant to capture some aspects of the difficulty of answering an empirical question. We then investigate both how different communication networks affect whether the community finds the best answer and the time it takes for the community to reach consensus on an answer. We measure these two epistemic desiderata on a continuum of networks sampled from the Watts-Strogatz spectrum. It turns out that finding the best answer and reaching consensus exhibit radically different patterns. The time it takes for a community to reach a consensus in these models roughly tracks mean path length in the network. Whether a scientific community finds the best answer, on the other hand, tracks neither mean path length nor clustering coefficient.</p>","PeriodicalId":46716,"journal":{"name":"Episteme-A Journal of Individual and Social Epistemology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/epi.2013.36","citationCount":"44","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scientific Networks on Data Landscapes: Question Difficulty, Epistemic Success, and Convergence.\",\"authors\":\"Patrick Grim,&nbsp;Daniel J Singer,&nbsp;Steven Fisher,&nbsp;Aaron Bramson,&nbsp;William J Berger,&nbsp;Christopher Reade,&nbsp;Carissa Flocken,&nbsp;Adam Sales\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/epi.2013.36\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A scientific community can be modeled as a collection of epistemic agents attempting to answer questions, in part by communicating about their hypotheses and results. We can treat the pathways of scientific communication as a network. When we do, it becomes clear that the interaction between the structure of the network and the nature of the question under investigation affects epistemic desiderata, including accuracy and speed to community consensus. Here we build on previous work, both our own and others', in order to get a firmer grasp on precisely which features of scientific communities interact with which features of scientific questions in order to influence epistemic outcomes. Here we introduce a measure on the landscape meant to capture some aspects of the difficulty of answering an empirical question. We then investigate both how different communication networks affect whether the community finds the best answer and the time it takes for the community to reach consensus on an answer. We measure these two epistemic desiderata on a continuum of networks sampled from the Watts-Strogatz spectrum. It turns out that finding the best answer and reaching consensus exhibit radically different patterns. The time it takes for a community to reach a consensus in these models roughly tracks mean path length in the network. Whether a scientific community finds the best answer, on the other hand, tracks neither mean path length nor clustering coefficient.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Episteme-A Journal of Individual and Social Epistemology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/epi.2013.36\",\"citationCount\":\"44\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Episteme-A Journal of Individual and Social Epistemology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2013.36\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Episteme-A Journal of Individual and Social Epistemology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2013.36","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 44

摘要

一个科学共同体可以被建模为试图回答问题的认知主体的集合,部分通过交流他们的假设和结果。我们可以把科学传播的途径看作是一个网络。当我们这样做时,很明显,网络结构和所调查问题的性质之间的相互作用会影响认知需求,包括准确性和社区共识的速度。在这里,我们以之前的工作为基础,包括我们自己和其他人的工作,以便更准确地掌握科学界的哪些特征与科学问题的哪些特征相互作用,从而影响认知结果。在这里,我们介绍了一个关于景观的测量,旨在捕捉回答经验问题的困难的某些方面。然后,我们调查了不同的通信网络如何影响社区是否找到最佳答案,以及社区就答案达成共识所需的时间。我们在从Watts-Strogatz谱中采样的连续网络上测量这两种认知需求。事实证明,寻找最佳答案和达成共识表现出截然不同的模式。在这些模型中,社区达成共识所需的时间大致与网络中的平均路径长度一致。另一方面,科学界是否找到了最佳答案,既不追踪平均路径长度,也不追踪聚类系数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Scientific Networks on Data Landscapes: Question Difficulty, Epistemic Success, and Convergence.

Scientific Networks on Data Landscapes: Question Difficulty, Epistemic Success, and Convergence.

Scientific Networks on Data Landscapes: Question Difficulty, Epistemic Success, and Convergence.

Scientific Networks on Data Landscapes: Question Difficulty, Epistemic Success, and Convergence.

A scientific community can be modeled as a collection of epistemic agents attempting to answer questions, in part by communicating about their hypotheses and results. We can treat the pathways of scientific communication as a network. When we do, it becomes clear that the interaction between the structure of the network and the nature of the question under investigation affects epistemic desiderata, including accuracy and speed to community consensus. Here we build on previous work, both our own and others', in order to get a firmer grasp on precisely which features of scientific communities interact with which features of scientific questions in order to influence epistemic outcomes. Here we introduce a measure on the landscape meant to capture some aspects of the difficulty of answering an empirical question. We then investigate both how different communication networks affect whether the community finds the best answer and the time it takes for the community to reach consensus on an answer. We measure these two epistemic desiderata on a continuum of networks sampled from the Watts-Strogatz spectrum. It turns out that finding the best answer and reaching consensus exhibit radically different patterns. The time it takes for a community to reach a consensus in these models roughly tracks mean path length in the network. Whether a scientific community finds the best answer, on the other hand, tracks neither mean path length nor clustering coefficient.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
11.80%
发文量
48
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信