correction of references (was: L. E. J. Brouwer and the Sub-Axiomatic Foundations of Mathematics)

[dennis.hamilton at acm.org]

From:  José Manuel Rodríguez Caballero
Sent: Monday, March 6, 2023 09:15
Subject: correction of references (was: L. E. J. Brouwer and the Sub-Axiomatic 
Foundations of Mathematics)

> Concerning the papers cited in the quote from the ChatGPT auto-reply to 
> Patrik's post,

> > In support of the idea of separating mathematics and computer science, I
> > would like to cite the following papers:
> >
> > E. Reck, ?Why Philosophy Matters for Mathematical Practice,? in The
> > Philosophy of Mathematics Today, eds. M. Otte and M. Panza (Oxford
> > University Press, 1997), 281-301.
> >
> >  H. G. Dales, ?The Separation of Mathematics from Philosophy,? in Logic
> > Colloquium '77, ed. P. Erd?s, A. Hajnal, and V. T. S?s (North-Holland
> > Publishing Company, 1978), 19-39.
> >
> > J. P. Burgess, ?Why I Am Not a Constructivist,? in Logic, Methodology and
> > Philosophy of Science IX, ed. L. Magnes and E. Stadler (Springer, 1994),
> > 315-324.
> >

> I think it's ChatGPT's responsibility whether these citations are right, 
> since I presented the quote as a Turing test assessment, not as my claim. 
> After the post, I searched for these papers on Google because I was curious 
> about the subject, and I was not able to find them. This was a surprise for 
> me.

I'm unclear how good Google is at finding papers of this sort.  I share the 
distress about how well ChatGPT does or does not get these right.

In the Vita of John P. Burgess on his Princeton site, there seems to be no 
paper/article of that title.  In the (Springer, 1995) volume IX of that 
series, those pages belong to another article.  There is a Burgess article, 
but not of that title.  Instead, "Non-classical logic and ontological 
non-commitment, avoiding abstract objects through modal operators."  He did 
have a paper, "Why I am Not a Nominalist" though.  There is a "Why I Am Not a 
Constructivist" paper by a different author that is not about mathematics at 
all, but about pedagogy.  Also, those are not the editors of that volume of 
"Logic, Methodology, ... ."

Logic Colloquium '77 is not by those editors and there is no paper by H. G. 
Dales.  Dales had something to say about "Truth in Mathematics" but not close 
to the ChatGPT citation.

"The Philosophy of Mathematics Today" was published in 1998, and has no paper 
by E. Reck.  There is "Occam's Razor and Scientific Method" by John P. Burgess 
though ??.  As a reality check, I found that paper in the Burgess CV.

I suggest that the Turing Test has not been passed, unless it is about being 
credible but not defensible, unless the impersonation is of a fraud.

An useful lesson.

 - Dennis