[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Amount Abstractor: ni
You mentioned awhile back some concerns with {ni}. It is worth
remembering that {ni} must work with all four types of metric that
humans use for measurement. Here is the brief:
On Guttman scales
A metric does not necessarily require rational numbers. As Guttman
pointed out in 1944, all forms of measurement belong to one of four
types of scale: categorical, ordinal, interval, and ratio.
(Actually, forms of measurement can belong to more than four, but
people conflate them into these four.)
The four scales are different primary mathematical structures:
equivalence relation, linear ordering, ordered Abelian group, and
Archimedean ordered field. They are different axiomatically, but
all serve as means of measurement.
Thus you can say this stone weights twice as much as that stone (ratio
scale), but you cannot meaningfully say this Fahrenheit temperature
(interval scale) is twice that temperature since the Fahrenheit scale
has an arbitrary zero. But you can add ten F. degrees to a
F. temperature. Similarly, you can say that a captain in the Army is
superior (ordinal scale) to a lieutenant but you cannot say by how
much he is superior (and indeed, the `how-muchness' is irrelevant).
Likewise, you can say that topaz is harder than quartz (Moh's ordinal
scale of hardness for minerals) but not how many degrees harder.
Finally, you can say that one animal is a cat and another one is a
dog.
Much progress in science comes from changing the type of scale used in
a measurement: from `it is cold outside' to `it is colder today than
yesterday' to `it is 10 F. degrees colder today than yesterday' to
`the thermal energy content of this piece of iron is 0.6% less than it
was yesterday'.
As for truth: if you are using a categorical scale, you may say that a
proposition belongs to the category of truthful propositions or the
category of false propositions. If you use such a scale, you are not
saying how much truth there is in a proposition, only that it is true,
not false. Much logic is based on there being only two categories,
true and false; it makes the mathematics simpler. The various fuzzy
logics are a formal attempt to add interval or ratio scales to logic.
Or you can say that this first proposition is more credible than that
second proposition, and that second proposition is more credible than
a third. This is an ordinal scaling. In a court case, a jury may
have to judge whether one person's testimony is more credible than
another's (ordinal scale) so as eventually to place the defendant in
one of the categories `guilty' or `not guilty'.
In artificial intelligence programs, numbers may be used to indicate
the quality of the evidence for a proposition. Even though the
numbers appear to suggest a familiar ratio scale, as used in measuring
weight or density, the computer program often limits operations on the
the numbers to a more restrictive set of axioms than that used by
rational numbers.
Here is a table:
Scales of Measurement
====================
Scale Basic Empirical Permissible Statistics Examples
Operations (invariantive)
Name of mathematical
structure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Categorical Determination of Number of cases Assign model numbers
(or Nominal) equality Mode e.g. Model T Ford
Contingency Specify species of
Equivalence correlations animal, e.g. cat
relation
Ordinal Determination of Median Hardness of minerals
greater or less Percentiles Quality of leather,
Order correlation lumber, wool
Linear ordering (type O) Pleasantness of odor
Interval Determination of Mean Temperature
equality of Standard deviation (Fahrenheit and
intervals or Order correlation Celsius)
differences (type I) Calendar dates
Product-moment
Ordered Abelian correlation
group
Ratio Determination of Geometric mean Length, weight, density,
equality of ratios Coefficient of resistance
variation Loudness scale (sones)
Archimedean Decibel
ordered field transformations
From:
S. S. Stevens, 1951, _Mathematics, Measurement, and Psychophysics_,
in Handbook of Experimental Psychology_, S. S. Stevens, Ed., NY: Wiley
See also:
Louis Guttman, 1944, _A Basis for Scaling Qualitative Data_,
American Sociological Review 9:139-150
Patrick Suppes, 1957, _Introduction to Logic_, NY: Van Nostrand
S. S. Stevens, 1958, _Measurement and Man_, Scienc 127:383-389
Louis Narens and R. Duncan Luce, 1986,
_Measurement: the Theory of Numerical Assignments_,
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 99 No. 2, p. 166-180
Alan Page Fiske, 1991, _Structures of Social Life_, NY: Macmillan