Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:09:58.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Elements of a Theory of Inexact Measurement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Ernest W. Adams
Ernest W. Adams*
Affiliation:
University of California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Modifications of current theories of ordinal, interval and extensive measurement are presented, which aim to accomodate the empirical fact that perfectly exact measurement is not possible (which is inconsistent with current theories). The modification consists in dropping the assumption that equality (in measure) is observable, but continuing to assume that inequality (greater or lesser) can be observed. The modifications are formulated mathematically, and the central problems of formal measurement theory—the existence and uniqueness of numerical measures consistent with data—are re-examined. Some results also are given on a problem which does not arise in current theories: namely that of determining limits of accuracy attainable on the basis of observations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , July 1965 , pp. 205 - 228
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Campbell, N. R. Physics: The Elements, Cambridge University Press, 1920. Republished as Foundations of Science, New York: Dover Publications, 1957.Google Scholar
[2] Cohen, M. R. and Nagel, E., An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method, New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1934.Google Scholar
[3] Goldman, A. J. “Resolution and separation theorems for polyhedral convex sets,” in Kuhn, H. W. and A. W. Tucker ets. Linear Inequalities and Related Systems, Annals of Mathematics Study No. 38, Princeton University Press, 1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Helmholz, H. V. “Zählen und Messen — theoretisch betrachtet,” in Philosophische Aufsätze Eduard Zeller Gewidmet, Leipzig, 1887. Reprinted in Gesammelte Abhandlungen, Vol. 3, 1895, pp. 356-91.Google Scholar
[5] Hempel, C. G. “Fundamentals of Concept Formation in Empirical Science,” International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, Vol. 2, no. 7, University of Chicago Press, 1952.Google Scholar
[6] Hölder, O., “Die Axiome der Quantität und die Lehre vom Mass,” Berichte der sachsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften math.-phys. Klasse, 1901, pp. 1–64.Google Scholar
[7] Luce, R. D. “Semiorders and a theory of utility discrimination,” Econometrica, Vol. 29, 1956, pp. 178–91.Google Scholar
[8] Scott, D. “Measurement structures and linear inequalities,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1964, pp. 233–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Scott, D. and Suppes, P. “Foundational Aspects of Theories of Measurement,” Journal of Symbolic Logic, Vol. 23, (1958), pp. 113–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Suppes, P. and Winet, M., “An Axiomatization of Utility Based on the Notion of Utility Differences,” Management Science, Vol. 1 1955, pp. 259–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11] Suppes, P. and Zinnes, J., “Basic measurement theory,” in Luce, R. D., Bush, R. R. and E. Galanter Handbook of Mathematical Psychology. Vol. 1, John Wiley and Sons, 1963.Google Scholar
[12] Stevens, S. S., “On the Theory of Scales of Measurement,” Science, Vol. 103 1946, pp. 677–680. Reprinted in Philosophy of Science, edited by A. Danto and S. Morgenbesser, New York: Meridian Books, 1960, pp. 141-149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[13] Tversky, A. “Finite additive structures,” Technical Report, Mathematical Psychology Program, University of Michigan, 1964.Google Scholar