Cyrille Imbert
Biographic Data
| ID | 3698651 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Cyrille Imbert |
| GIVEN NAMES | Cyrille |
| FAMILY NAME | Imbert |
| SIGNATURE | IMBERT C |
| AFFILIATIONS | Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 11 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 19 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 11 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2009 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2024 |
| H-INDEX | 3 |
Explaining Scientific Collaboration
For two centuries, collaborative research has become increasingly widespread. Various explanations of this trend have been proposed. Here, we offer a novel functional explanation of it. It differs from ac- counts like that of Wray (2002) by the precise socio-epistemic mech- anism that grounds the beneficialness of collaboration. Boyer-Kassem and Imbert (2015) show how minor differences in the step-efficiency of collaborative groups can make them …
Formal Verification, Scientific Code, and the Epistemological Heterogeneity of Computational Science
Various errors can affect scientific code and detecting them is a central concern within computational science. Could formal verification methods, which are now available tools, be widely adopted to guarantee the general reliability of scientific code? After discussing their benefits and drawbacks, we claim that, absent significant changes as regards features like their user-friendliness and versatility, these methods are unlikely to be adopted t…
Improving Deliberations by Reducing Misrepresentation Effects
Deliberative and decisional groups play crucial roles in most aspects of social life. But it is not obvious how to organize these groups and various socio-cognitive mechanisms can spoil debates and decisions. In this paper we focus on one such important mechanism: the misrepresentation of views, i.e. when agents express views that are aligned with those already expressed, and which differ from their private opinions. We introduce a model to analy…
Scientific Collaboration
Epistemic accounts of scientific collaboration usually assume that, one way or another, two heads really are more than twice better than one. We show that this hypothesis is unduly strong. We present a deliberately crude model with unfavorable hypotheses. We show that, even then, when the priority rule is applied, large differences in successfulness can emerge from small differences in efficiency, with sometimes increasing marginal returns. We em…
Introduction, SI of Synthese “The collective dimension of science”
New mathematics for old physics
Unfolding in the empirical sciences
Relevance, Not Invariance, Explanatoriness, Not Manipulability
According to Woodward’s causal model of explanation, explanatory information is relevant for manipulation purposes and indicates by means of invariant causal relations how to change the value of certain target explanandum variables by intervening on others. Therefore, the depth of an explanation is evaluated through the size of the domain of invariance of the generalization involved. In this article, I argue that Woodward’s account of explanatory…
Explication et pertinence
À rebours des discussions sur l’explication, qui semblent faire de la pertinence explicative un problème unique, plusieurs critères de pertinence explicative sont ici distingués. Est en particulier soulignée l’importance de la notion de pertinence intra-scientifique, qui est analysée de façon précise sur la base de l’explication de la loi des aires. Les conceptions traditionnelles de l’explication, et notamment la théorie causale ainsi que la thé…
Une objectivité kaléidoscopique
Computer simulations as experiments
Computer simulations as experiments
Scientific Collaboration
Epistemic accounts of scientific collaboration usually assume that, one way or another, two heads really are more than twice better than one. We show that this hypothesis is unduly strong. We present a deliberately crude model with unfavorable hypotheses. We show that, even then, when the priority rule is applied, large differences in successfulness can emerge from small differences in efficiency, with sometimes increasing marginal returns. We em…
Unfolding in the empirical sciences
Une objectivité kaléidoscopique
Formal Verification, Scientific Code, and the Epistemological Heterogeneity of Computational Science
Various errors can affect scientific code and detecting them is a central concern within computational science. Could formal verification methods, which are now available tools, be widely adopted to guarantee the general reliability of scientific code? After discussing their benefits and drawbacks, we claim that, absent significant changes as regards features like their user-friendliness and versatility, these methods are unlikely to be adopted t…
Computer simulations as experiments
Explication et pertinence
À rebours des discussions sur l’explication, qui semblent faire de la pertinence explicative un problème unique, plusieurs critères de pertinence explicative sont ici distingués. Est en particulier soulignée l’importance de la notion de pertinence intra-scientifique, qui est analysée de façon précise sur la base de l’explication de la loi des aires. Les conceptions traditionnelles de l’explication, et notamment la théorie causale ainsi que la thé…
Une objectivité kaléidoscopique
New mathematics for old physics
Unfolding in the empirical sciences
Relevance, Not Invariance, Explanatoriness, Not Manipulability
According to Woodward’s causal model of explanation, explanatory information is relevant for manipulation purposes and indicates by means of invariant causal relations how to change the value of certain target explanandum variables by intervening on others. Therefore, the depth of an explanation is evaluated through the size of the domain of invariance of the generalization involved. In this article, I argue that Woodward’s account of explanatory…
Introduction, SI of Synthese “The collective dimension of science”
Scientific Collaboration
Epistemic accounts of scientific collaboration usually assume that, one way or another, two heads really are more than twice better than one. We show that this hypothesis is unduly strong. We present a deliberately crude model with unfavorable hypotheses. We show that, even then, when the priority rule is applied, large differences in successfulness can emerge from small differences in efficiency, with sometimes increasing marginal returns. We em…
Improving Deliberations by Reducing Misrepresentation Effects
Deliberative and decisional groups play crucial roles in most aspects of social life. But it is not obvious how to organize these groups and various socio-cognitive mechanisms can spoil debates and decisions. In this paper we focus on one such important mechanism: the misrepresentation of views, i.e. when agents express views that are aligned with those already expressed, and which differ from their private opinions. We introduce a model to analy…
Formal Verification, Scientific Code, and the Epistemological Heterogeneity of Computational Science
Various errors can affect scientific code and detecting them is a central concern within computational science. Could formal verification methods, which are now available tools, be widely adopted to guarantee the general reliability of scientific code? After discussing their benefits and drawbacks, we claim that, absent significant changes as regards features like their user-friendliness and versatility, these methods are unlikely to be adopted t…
Explaining Scientific Collaboration
For two centuries, collaborative research has become increasingly widespread. Various explanations of this trend have been proposed. Here, we offer a novel functional explanation of it. It differs from ac- counts like that of Wray (2002) by the precise socio-epistemic mech- anism that grounds the beneficialness of collaboration. Boyer-Kassem and Imbert (2015) show how minor differences in the step-efficiency of collaborative groups can make them …
Epistemology (9 works) · Philosophy (8 works) · Computer Science (6 works) · Philosophy and History of Science (6 works) · Philosophy of science (4 works) · Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms (3 works) · Mathematics (3 works) · Artificial Intelligence (2 works) · Artificial Intelligence (2 works) · Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies (2 works)