Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

No Certificate, No Categorical Speech Act: A Brouwerian Assertibility Constraint for Public Reason

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that high-stakes AI systems may only assert or deny claims when they can exhibit a publicly contestable certificate of entitlement; otherwise they must return Undetermined.

desk verdict A serious normative proposal for gating AI categorical outputs behind contestable certificates—worth refereeing, but its practical payoff stays conditional on unproven scalability. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.03971 v4 pith:46PDZNA7 submitted 2026-03-04 cs.CY cs.AIcs.LGcs.LO

Michael Jülich This is my paper
classification cs.CYcs.AIcs.LGcs.LO
keywords BrouwerianassertibilityconstraintcertificateofentitlementUndeterminedstatusepistemicagencygenerativeAIalgorithmicabstentionconstructivewarrantpublicjustification
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish a design norm for high-stakes AI speech: a system may assert or deny a claim only when it can exhibit a publicly inspectable and contestable certificate of entitlement—a certified bound, separation margin, proof artifact, or documented record bundle—and otherwise must return Undetermined with a reason. The core insight is that categorical machine speech should mark justified entitlement, not the underlying truth value of the claim. If the paper is right, confidence-scored verdicts without exhibited warrants are epistemically dishonest in public-facing domains, and Undetermined becomes a mandatory interface status rather than a tunable reject option. The proposed mechanisms—a certificate-as-boundary-object, a three-status interface, and an output contract with reason codes—operationalize the constraint while preserving room for contestation. A sympathetic reader would care because this offers a concrete route from the political worry about AI's hypersuasive verdicts to an implementable speech-act gate.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the 'adequate forcing certificate': a finite, auditor-checkable boundary object whose internal witness (certified interval [ℓ,u] or separation margin ℓ_i > u_j) forces a threshold or argmax predicate under the declared internal regime, while its standing fields (scope, provenance, record-time) satisfy the public regime. The design lemma then shows that total binary outputs plus certificate soundness on a scope imply witnessed decidability on that scope. The output contract with reason-coded Undetermined completes the mechanism, turning absent warrant into an accountable status.

What would settle it

Inspect a deployed certificate-sound interface on a single in-scope input: if it outputs Asserted while the attached certificate's interval or margin does not force the predicate (e.g., the certified interval still straddles the threshold), the design lemma is false. Alternatively, a benchmark showing that certified bounds on realistic high-stakes inputs almost never force threshold crossings—even with heavy compute—would show that the constraint degenerates to near-universal Undetermined and leaves the epistemic-agency claim untested.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central discovery is a structural equivalence: a binary-total, certificate-sound interface necessarily yields a witnessed decision procedure for its declared predicate on its declared scope. Therefore, if you demand both that every query gets a yes/no answer and that yes/no answers carry sound certificates, you are committed to witnessed decidability on that scope. For threshold and argmax predicates, witnessed decidability requires extra structure—separation margins or locatedness-style assumptions—so without that structure Undetermined is forced. The statuses A/D/U therefore attach to the warrant-claim 'the system is entitled to assert or deny φ,' not to the w

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes practical certification regimes can actually produce sound forcing witnesses—certified bounds or separation margins—for high-stakes threshold and argmax predicates under realistic scope and budget; the paper itself concedes strict interval bounds are explosive and fully constructive behavior is not yet realizable.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • High-stakes AI outputs in law, health, and public deliberation would be gated by exhibited warrants: no adequate forcing certificate, no categorical speech act.
  • Undetermined becomes a first-class, mandatory status; vendors cannot tune it away without changing the contract (scope, regime, budget) in auditable ways.
  • Probabilistic methods like conformal prediction or semantic entropy serve only as certificate ingredients; they do not by themselves license assertion or denial.
  • Forced A/D verdicts are stable under refinement and sound for every completion consistent with the certified bounds, so later information can only move U to A/D or reverse via new record grounds.
  • Any attempt to deploy a binary-total, certificate-sound interface commits the deployer to witnessed decidability on the declared scope, making the choice of scope a normative decision.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An immediate testable extension would be a benchmark where a hybrid wrapper (classical LLM plus certified decision head) reports A/D/U over a corpus, and auditors check that every A/D certificate actually forces the declared predicate; the design lemma predicts zero violations if the wrapper is honest.
  • If the constraint were adopted as a regulatory interface requirement, abstention rates would become contractual parameters; otherwise abstention can be gamed by narrowing scope, so externally pinned contracts would be the real enforcement mechanism.
  • The design lemma suggests a general tension for transparency: any fully transparent binary classifier with sound certificates is effectively a verification procedure, so the practical frontier is not better confidence scores but better forcing witnesses—tighter bounds, narrower scopes, or verified decision heads.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a Brouwerian assertibility constraint for high-stakes AI: a system may issue categorical speech acts (Asserted/Denied) only when it can exhibit a publicly inspectable and contestable certificate of entitlement; otherwise it must return Undetermined. The framework develops a two-dimensional notion of entitlement (internal witness under a certification regime R, and public standing under a standard-threshold-record triple <S,τ,t>), connects these through a certificate as a boundary object, and specifies an output contract with reason-coded abstentions. The formal core is a design lemma (Proposition 1) showing that a binary-total, certificate-sound interface yields a witnessed decision procedure on its declared scope, which the paper uses to argue that Undetermined is mandatory rather than a tunable reject option. The paper discusses implementability via interval bound propagation and hybrid surrogates, and it explicitly acknowledges that fully constructive behavior is an idealization.

Significance. If the framework were fully realized, it would reconfigure AI outputs as warrant-claims rather than truth claims, and it would link constructive verification traditions to public-reason norms in a novel way. The paper is genuinely interdisciplinary, drawing on Brouwer, political epistemology, and verification practice, and it is honest about its limitations. The formal definitions and Proposition 1 are internally consistent, and the paper does not overclaim completeness. Its main value is as a normative design proposal; the practical usefulness depends on the empirical availability of forcing certificates, which the paper concedes is not currently established. This conditional character is the central source of risk for the paper's applied claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.5, Proposition 1, Eq. (3)] The design lemma is a definitional consequence rather than an independent derivation. The output contract in Eq. (3) already defines U as the status whenever no adequate forcing certificate exists, so the conclusion that U is mandatory is built into the definition. Proposition 1 shows the logical equivalence between binary totality plus certificate soundness and witnessed decidability, but it does not by itself justify the normative claim that U is mandatory. The paper's abstract and Section 4.5 present the lemma as if it 'shows' the mandatory status; this overstates its role. The lemma is best framed as a diagnostic reformulation of the contract, not as a philosophical argument for the constraint.
  2. [§4.2.1, §5, §6.1, §6.3] The implementability gap is load-bearing for the paper's practical claims. The paper concedes in §4.2.1 that strict interval bounds explode on massive autoregressive Transformers, in §6.1 that fully constructive behavior is an idealization, and in §6.3 that hybrid surrogates are only sketched. Yet §5 asserts that 'existing internal regimes can already construct finite witnesses of the kind required' without providing a concrete demonstration for any realistic high-stakes predicate. Without evidence that forcing witnesses can be produced for a non-trivial fraction of in-scope inputs within declared budgets, the framework may collapse to near-constant U, leaving the promised preservation of epistemic agency untested. A concrete proof-of-concept—e.g., a verified decision head over a frozen LLM for a specific medical or civic predicate, with measured U-rates—would materially strengthen the p
  3. [§4.4 and §4.1.3] The link between internal 'forcing' and public 'contestability' is underdeveloped. The certificate bundles a mathematical witness (e.g., an interval bound) with standing metadata, but the paper does not explain how the internal bound becomes contestable in the relevant normative sense. Appendix D.3 specifies procedural re-check and challenge routes, but this addresses verification, not the deeper political-epistemic contestation of the world-claim itself. The boundary-object metaphor is evocative, but the operational mechanism connecting sound bounds to public justification remains vague. Since the central claim is about preserving epistemic agency through contestable warrants, this gap should be addressed, or the scope of the claim narrowed.
minor comments (4)
  1. [General] The paper is longer than needed and repeats its core definitions and arguments across Sections 4, 5, and the appendices. Tightening would improve readability.
  2. [§4.3] The Tooth Social case is clearly labeled as illustrative, but the name and the toy example may distract. A more realistic or explicitly fictional framing could help.
  3. [Acknowledgments] The acknowledgment that the author stress-tested the paper with large language models is unusual and self-referential. It is defensible given the paper's theme, but it might be better placed in a footnote to avoid the appearance of performative proof.
  4. [§4.4] The condition Adeq_C(κ) is used in Eq. (3) before it is formally defined. A short forward reference or a preliminary definition at the start of §4.4 would remove this small discontinuity.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The design lemma (Prop. 1) is a definitional restatement of the certificate-sound output contract: witnessed decidability is just the interface reread, so mandatory-U is built into the definitions; the normative core is argued independently.

  1. self definitional [Section 4.5, Definition 1 and Proposition 1 (cf. output contract v_x definition in Section 4.4)]
    "Any binary-total, certificate-sound interface for p on Σ, relative to C, yields a witnessed decision procedure for p on Σ, relative to C. Proof Define the induced procedure D_C as follows. Given any y∈Σ, run the contract-level evaluation of I_C(y). ... If v_y = A, output the left disjunct together with κ_y; if v_y = D, output the right disjunct together with κ_y. By certificate soundness ... κ_y is adequate and forces p(y) ... Therefore D_C is a witnessed decision procedure."

    Definition 1's certificate-soundness already requires v_x=A ⇒ Adeq_C(κ_x) ∧ κ_x ⊩_C p(x) and v_x=D ⇒ Adeq_C(κ_x) ∧ κ_x ⊩_C ¬p(x), while binary totality requires v_x∈{A,D}. The 'induced' D_C is just the interface I_C with A/D relabeled as left/right disjuncts plus κ_x; no new computation or evidence is added. Hence 'witnessed decidability' is the certificate-sound output contract restated. Correspondingly, the conclusion that U is mandatory whenever no adequate forcing certificate exists is exactly the output contract's 'U otherwise' clause, not an independent derivation. The normative epistemic-agency argument, however, does not depend on this lemma.

full rationale

The paper is primarily a normative/philosophical framework, not an empirical prediction exercise. Its only formally load-bearing 'result' that can be reduced to definitions is Proposition 1, which the paper itself labels 'intentionally elementary and diagnostic.' That step is a faithful formalization of the output contract, and the central Brouwerian assertibility constraint is argued from epistemic-agency considerations (Section 2), not from the lemma. The implementability gap (Sections 4.2.1, 6.1, 6.3) is an acknowledged idealization and a correctness/feasibility limitation, not a circularity. The one self-citation (Jülich 2025, footnote 3) is a side-supporting philosophical reference and is not load-bearing for the main argument. Overall, the derivation chain is largely self-contained; the definitional lemma warrants a moderate score but does not undermine the independent normative core.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework is normative and relies on institutional feasibility assumptions rather than fitted parameters. The free parameters listed are contract parameters that the paper deliberately leaves to democratic/institutional choice. No novel physical or ontological entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • τ (assertion threshold) = 0.7 in Tooth Social case study
    Institutional/public parameter determining when a score forces Asserted vs Denied. The paper says it must be set by democratic or domain processes, not by data; status assignments shift with τ.
  • B_budget and N_max (resource bounds) = unspecified
    Contract parameters bounding witness search and refinement. Whether U-COMPUTE or A/D results depends on these; the paper notes they are externally auditable and can be gamed.
  • S (public evidential standard) = unspecified
    Normative standard governing public standing and contestability. It is a declared design parameter, not fitted to data.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Assertion/denial of a world-claim requires an exhibited constructive witness (BHK/forcing semantics).
    Adopted from Brouwer/Heyting; it is the normative starting point that makes U mandatory. Introduced in Section 3.2.3.
  • domain assumption Model scores can be represented as nested rational intervals with sound, checkable bounds under an internal regime R.
    Section 4.2.1 declares this an idealized representation; it is not true of standard neural networks without additional certification.
  • domain assumption There exist auditor-accessible certificate checking procedures (Check_C) that verify witness validity and public standing.
    Section 4.4 assumes institutional audit or joint governance; no concrete implementation is provided.
  • domain assumption Interval/IBP-style abstract transformers compose soundly for neural networks and can sometimes produce forcing bounds or margins.
    Section 5 and Appendix C rely on standard verification results; hardness and scalability are acknowledged in Section 6.1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of No Certificate, No Categorical Speech Act: A Brouwerian Assertibility Constraint for Public Reason." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/46PDZNA7

@misc{pith2026260303971,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: No Certificate, No Categorical Speech Act: A Brouwerian Assertibility Constraint for Public Reason},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/46PDZNA7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.03971}
}
read the original abstract

Generative AI can convert uncertainty into authoritative-seeming verdicts, displacing the justificatory work on which democratic epistemic agency depends. As a corrective, I propose a Brouwer-inspired assertibility constraint for responsible AI: in high-stakes domains, systems may assert or deny claims only if they can provide a publicly inspectable and contestable certificate of entitlement; otherwise they must return Undetermined. This constraint yields a three-status interface semantics (Asserted, Denied, Undetermined) whose statuses mark entitlement to categorical speech rather than truth values of the underlying world-claim. The framework distinguishes internal entitlement from public standing while connecting them through the certificate as a boundary object. Philosophically, it develops a form of applied intuitionism: resistance to unwarranted completeness becomes a norm of public machine speech, under which categorical commitment requires exhibited and contestable entitlement. I operationalize the constraint through structured certificates, decision-layer gates for threshold and argmax predicates, and a reason-coded output contract. A design lemma shows that, under a refutation-soundness condition on the contractually specified negative side, certificate-sound binary totality presupposes witnessed decidability on the declared scope. Under the output contract, Undetermined is therefore not a tunable reject option but a mandatory status whenever the available certificates do not uniquely license assertion or denial. By making outputs answerable to contestable warrants rather than confidence alone, the paper aims to preserve epistemic agency where automated speech enters public justification.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Cherry-pick Override: Unsafe Directional Commitment in LLM Judges under Mixed Evidence

    cs.SE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    The paper defines Cherry-pick Override (CCO) as unauthorized directional commitment by LLM judges under mixed evidence and quantifies its prevalence (>84% on AVeriTeC conflicting subset) while testing intervention lad...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    , Haeusler, E.H

    alkmim2020reasoning APACrefauthors Alkmim, B. , Haeusler, E.H. Schwabe, D. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Reasoning over knowledge graphs in an intuitionistic description logic? Reasoning over knowledge graphs in an intuitionistic description logic? Proceedings of the 3rd Explainable AI in Law Workshop ( XAILA 2020) Proceedings of the 3rd Explainable AI in Law W...

    2020

  2. [2]

    , Lucas, J

    anil2019sorting APACrefauthors Anil, C. , Lucas, J. Grosse, R. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Sorting out Lipschitz function approximation Sorting out Lipschitz function approximation . Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning \ ( \ 291--301). PMLR

    2019

  3. [3]

    , Bail, C.A

    argyle2023leveraging APACrefauthors Argyle, L.P. , Bail, C.A. , Busby, E.C. , Gubler, J.R. , Howe, T. , Rytting, C. Wingate, J. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Leveraging AI for democratic discourse: Chat interventions can improve online political conversations at scale Leveraging AI for democratic discourse: Chat interventions can improve online political conver...

    doi:10.1073/pnas.2311627120 2023

  4. [4]

    , Bellamy, R.K.E

    arnold2019factsheets APACrefauthors Arnold, M. , Bellamy, R.K.E. , Hind, M. , Houde, S. , Mehta, S. , Mojsilovic, A. Varshney, K.R. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . FactSheets : Increasing trust in AI services through supplier's declarations of conformity FactSheets : Increasing trust in AI services through supplier's declarations of conformity . IBM Journal of Re...

    arXiv 2019

  5. [5]

    \ Iemhoff, R

    baaz2006konstruktivismus APACrefauthors Baaz, M. \ Iemhoff, R. APACrefauthors \ 2006 . Konstruktivismus und Intuitionismus Konstruktivismus und Intuitionismus . Internationale Mathematische Nachrichten 201 13--23

    2006

  6. [6]

    APACrefauthors \ 2017

    belle2017logic APACrefauthors Belle, V. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Logic meets probability: Towards explainable AI systems for uncertain worlds Logic meets probability: Towards explainable AI systems for uncertain worlds . Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence ( IJCAI-17) Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Int...

    2017

  7. [7]

    , Gebru, T

    bender2021dangers APACrefauthors Bender, E.M. , Gebru, T. , McMillan-Major, A. Shmitchell, S. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT 21) Pro...

    2021

  8. [8]

    , Fojtik, V

    boche2025computability APACrefauthors Boche, H. , Fojtik, V. , Fono, A. Kutyniok, G. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . Computability of classification and deep learning: From theoretical limits to practical feasibility through quantization Computability of classification and deep learning: From theoretical limits to practical feasibility through quantization . Jour...

    work page doi:10.1007/s00041-025-10163-w 2025

Show all 90 references
  1. [9]

    APACrefauthors \ 1994

    brandom1994making APACrefauthors Brandom, R. APACrefauthors \ 1994 . Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment Making it explicit: Reasoning, representing, and discursive commitment . Harvard University Press

    1994

  2. [10]

    APACrefauthors \ 1949

    brouwer1949consciousness APACrefauthors Brouwer, L.E.J. APACrefauthors \ 1949 . Consciousness, philosophy and mathematics Consciousness, philosophy and mathematics . E.W. Beth, H.J. Pos \ H.J.A. Hollak\ ( ), Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of Philosophy Proceed...

    1949

  3. [11]

    APACrefauthors \ 1955

    brouwer1955effect APACrefauthors Brouwer, L.E.J. APACrefauthors \ 1955 . The effect of intuitionism on classical algebra of logic The effect of intuitionism on classical algebra of logic . Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences 57...

    1955

  4. [12]

    APACrefauthors \ 1981

    brouwer1981cambridge APACrefauthors Brouwer, L.E.J. APACrefauthors \ 1981 . Brouwer's Cambridge lectures on intuitionism Brouwer's Cambridge lectures on intuitionism \ (D. van Dalen, ). Cambridge University Press

    1981

  5. [13]

    , Farinhas, A

    campos2024conformal APACrefauthors Campos, M. , Farinhas, A. , Zerva, C. , Figueiredo, M.A.T. Martins, A.F.T. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Conformal prediction for natural language processing: A survey Conformal prediction for natural language processing: A survey . Transactions of...

    2024 doi

  6. [14]

    APACrefauthors \ 1979

    cavell1979claim APACrefauthors Cavell, S. APACrefauthors \ 1979 . The claim of reason: Wittgenstein , skepticism, morality, and tragedy The claim of reason: Wittgenstein , skepticism, morality, and tragedy . Oxford University Press

    1979

  7. [15]

    APACrefauthors \ 1981

    cavell1981pursuits APACrefauthors Cavell, S. APACrefauthors \ 1981 . Pursuits of Happiness: The Hollywood Comedy of Remarriage Pursuits of happiness: The Hollywood comedy of remarriage . Harvard University Press

    1981

  8. [16]

    APACrefauthors \ 2002

    cavell2002knowing APACrefauthors Cavell, S. APACrefauthors \ 2002 . Knowing and acknowledging Knowing and acknowledging . Must we mean what we say? A book of essays Must we mean what we say? A book of essays \ ( \ 238--266). Cambridge University Press

    2002

  9. [17]

    APACrefauthors \ 2023

    coeckelbergh2023democracy APACrefauthors Coeckelbergh, M. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Democracy, epistemic agency, and AI : Political epistemology in times of artificial intelligence Democracy, epistemic agency, and AI : Political epistemology in times of artificial intelligence ....

    2023 doi

  10. [18]

    APACrefauthors \ 2024

    coeckelbergh2024why APACrefauthors Coeckelbergh, M. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Why AI undermines democracy and what to do about it Why AI undermines democracy and what to do about it . Polity

    2024

  11. [19]

    APACrefauthors \ 1986

    cohen1986epistemic APACrefauthors Cohen, J. APACrefauthors \ 1986 . An epistemic conception of democracy An epistemic conception of democracy . Ethics 97 1 26--38, APACrefDOI doi:10.1086/292815 APACrefDOI

    1986 doi

  12. [20]

    , Rosenfeld, E

    cohen2019certified APACrefauthors Cohen, J.M. , Rosenfeld, E. Kolter, J.Z. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Certified adversarial robustness via randomized smoothing Certified adversarial robustness via randomized smoothing . Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine ...

    2019

  13. [21]

    Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B), 12 C.F.R

    cfpb2023equal APACrefauthors Consumer Financial Protection Bureau APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B), 12 C.F.R. Part 1002 . Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B), 12 C.F.R. Part 1002 . Electronic Code of Federal Regulations . APACrefURL h...

    2023

  14. [22]

    APACrefauthors \ 2000

    dummett2000elements APACrefauthors Dummett, M. APACrefauthors \ 2000 . Elements of intuitionism Elements of intuitionism \ ( 2nd \ ). Oxford University Press

    2000

  15. [23]

    \ Wiener, Y

    elyaniv2010foundations APACrefauthors El-Yaniv, R. \ Wiener, Y. APACrefauthors \ 2010 . On the foundations of noise-free selective classification On the foundations of noise-free selective classification . Journal of Machine Learning Research 11 53 1605--1641, APACrefURL http:...

    2010

  16. [24]

    APACrefauthors \ 2011

    enoch2011taking APACrefauthors Enoch, D. APACrefauthors \ 2011 . Taking morality seriously: A defense of robust realism Taking morality seriously: A defense of robust realism . Oxford University Press

    2011

  17. [25]

    APACrefauthors \ 2008

    estlund2008democratic APACrefauthors Estlund, D. APACrefauthors \ 2008 . Democratic Authority: A Philosophical Framework Democratic authority: A philosophical framework . Princeton University Press

    2008

  18. [26]

    \ Schou, J

    farkas2020post APACrefauthors Farkas, J. \ Schou, J. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Post-truth discourses and their limits: A democratic crisis? Post-truth discourses and their limits: A democratic crisis? G. Terzis, D. Kloza, E. Ku \. z elewska \ D. Trottier\ ( ), Disinformation and...

    2020

  19. [27]

    APACrefauthors \ 2025

    ferdman2025ai APACrefauthors Ferdman, A. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . AI , deskilling, and the prospects for public reason AI , deskilling, and the prospects for public reason . Minds & Machines 35 Article 38, Advanced online publication, APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/s11023-025-09737-w A...

    2025 doi

  20. [28]

    APACrefauthors \ 2008

    ferreiros2008crisis APACrefauthors Ferreir \'o s, J. APACrefauthors \ 2008 . The crisis in the foundations of mathematics The crisis in the foundations of mathematics . T. Gowers\ ( ), The Princeton companion to mathematics The Princeton companion to mathematics \ ( \ 142--156...

    2008

  21. [29]

    APACrefauthors \ 1975

    fine1975vagueness APACrefauthors Fine, K. APACrefauthors \ 1975 . Vagueness, truth and logic Vagueness, truth and logic . Synthese 30 3--4 265--300, APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/BF00485047 APACrefDOI

    1975 doi

  22. [30]

    \ El-Yaniv, R

    geifman2017selective APACrefauthors Geifman, Y. \ El-Yaniv, R. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Selective classification for deep neural networks Selective classification for deep neural networks . Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) Advances in Neural Information ...

    2017

  23. [31]

    \ Ambridge, T.W

    ghica2021global APACrefauthors Ghica, D.R. \ Ambridge, T.W. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Global optimisation with constructive reals Global optimisation with constructive reals . 2021 36th Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS) 2021 36th Annual ACM/IEEE Sympo...

    2021

  24. [32]

    , Kim, S

    gholami2021survey APACrefauthors Gholami, A. , Kim, S. , Dong, Z. , Yao, Z. , Mahoney, M.W. Keutzer, K. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . A survey of quantization methods for efficient neural network inference A survey of quantization methods for efficient neural network inference . arX...

    2021 doi arXiv

  25. [33]

    , Dvijotham, K

    gowal2018effectiveness APACrefauthors Gowal, S. , Dvijotham, K. , Stanforth, R. , Bunel, R. , Qin, C. , Uesato, J. Kohli, P. APACrefauthors \ 2018 . On the effectiveness of interval bound propagation for training verifiably robust models On the effectiveness of interval bound ...

    2018 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    APACrefauthors \ 1981

    habermas1981theorie APACrefauthors Habermas, J. APACrefauthors \ 1981 . Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns \ ( \ 1--2). Suhrkamp

    1981

  27. [35]

    , Tappin, B.M

    hackenburg2025levers APACrefauthors Hackenburg, K. , Tappin, B.M. , Hewitt, L. , Saunders, E. , Black, S. , Lin, H. Summerfield, C. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . The levers of political persuasion with conversational artificial intelligence The levers of political persuasion with co...

    2025 doi

  28. [36]

    , de Paiva, V

    haeusler2010intuitionistic APACrefauthors Haeusler, E.H. , de Paiva, V. Rademaker, A. APACrefauthors \ 2010 . Intuitionistic logic and legal ontologies Intuitionistic logic and legal ontologies . R.G.F. Winkels\ ( ), Legal knowledge and information systems: JURIX 2010: The Twe...

    2010

  29. [38]

    APACrefauthors \ 2019

    hao2019why APACrefauthors Hao, K. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Why AI is a threat to democracy -- and what we can do to stop it Why AI is a threat to democracy -- and what we can do to stop it . MIT Technology Review https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/02/26/66043/ why-ai-is-a-th...

    2019

  30. [39]

    APACrefauthors \ 1931

    heyting1931intuitionistische APACrefauthors Heyting, A. APACrefauthors \ 1931 . Die intuitionistische Grundlegung der Mathematik Die intuitionistische Grundlegung der Mathematik . Erkenntnis 2 1 106--115, APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/BF02028143 APACrefDOI

    1931 doi

  31. [40]

    , Humphries, J

    hicks2024chatgpt APACrefauthors Hicks, M.T. , Humphries, J. Slater, J. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . ChatGPT is bullshit ChatGPT is bullshit . Ethics and Information Technology 26 2 38, APACrefDOI doi:10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5 APACrefDOI

    2024 doi

  32. [41]

    APACrefauthors \ 1988

    horne1988macmillan APACrefauthors Horne, A. APACrefauthors \ 1988 . Macmillan: 1894--1956 Macmillan: 1894--1956 . Pan Books

    1988

  33. [42]

    APACrefauthors \ 2024

    iemhoff2024intuitionism APACrefauthors Iemhoff, R. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Intuitionism in the philosophy of mathematics Intuitionism in the philosophy of mathematics . E.N. Zalta\ U. Nodelman\ ( ), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosoph...

    2024

  34. [43]

    APACrefauthors \ 2010

    jorke2010epistemic APACrefauthors J \"o rke, D. APACrefauthors \ 2010 . The epistemic turn of critical theory: Implications for deliberative politics and policy-making The epistemic turn of critical theory: Implications for deliberative politics and policy-making . Critical Po...

    2010 doi

  35. [44]

    APACrefauthors \ 2025

    julich2025no APACrefauthors J \"u lich, M. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . No-miracles argument of law: Jurisprudence meets structural realism No-miracles argument of law: Jurisprudence meets structural realism . Journal for General Philosophy of Science Advanced online publication, A...

    2025 doi

  36. [45]

    APACrefauthors \ 2023

    jungherr2023artificial APACrefauthors Jungherr, A. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Artificial intelligence and democracy: A conceptual framework Artificial intelligence and democracy: A conceptual framework . Social Media + Society 9 3 1--14, APACrefDOI doi:10.1177/20563051231186353 A...

    2023 doi

  37. [46]

    APACrefauthors \ 2000

    keefe2000theories APACrefauthors Keefe, R. APACrefauthors \ 2000 . Theories of vagueness Theories of vagueness . Cambridge University Press

    2000

  38. [47]

    \ Kriner, D

    kreps2023how APACrefauthors Kreps, S. \ Kriner, D. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . How AI threatens democracy How AI threatens democracy . Journal of Democracy 34 4 122--131, APACrefDOI doi:10.1353/jod.2023.a907693 APACrefDOI

    2023 doi

  39. [48]

    , Gal, Y

    kuhn2023semantic APACrefauthors Kuhn, L. , Gal, Y. Farquhar, S. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Semantic uncertainty: Linguistic invariances for uncertainty estimation in natural language generation Semantic uncertainty: Linguistic invariances for uncertainty estimation in natural lan...

    2023

  40. [49]

    APACrefauthors \ 2020

    lafont2020democracy APACrefauthors Lafont, C. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Democracy without shortcuts: A participatory conception of deliberative democracy Democracy without shortcuts: A participatory conception of deliberative democracy . Oxford University Press

    2020

  41. [50]

    APACrefauthors \ 2013

    landemore2013democratic APACrefauthors Landemore, H. APACrefauthors \ 2013 . Democratic reason: Politics, collective intelligence, and the rule of the many Democratic reason: Politics, collective intelligence, and the rule of the many . Princeton University Press

    2013

  42. [51]

    APACrefauthors \ 2017

    landemore2017beyond APACrefauthors Landemore, H. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Beyond the fact of disagreement? The epistemic turn in deliberative democracy Beyond the fact of disagreement? The epistemic turn in deliberative democracy . Social Epistemology 31 3 277--295, APACrefDOI ...

    2017

  43. [52]

    APACrefauthors \ 2025

    lazar2025governing APACrefauthors Lazar, S. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . Governing the Algorithmic City Governing the Algorithmic City . Philosophy & Public Affairs Advanced online publication, APACrefDOI doi:10.1111/papa.12279 APACrefDOI

    2025 doi

  44. [53]

    , Czarnek, G

    lin2025persuading APACrefauthors Lin, H. , Czarnek, G. , Lewis, B. , White, J.P. , Berinsky, A.J. , Costello, T.H. Rand, D.G. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . Persuading voters using human--artificial intelligence dialogues Persuading voters using human--artificial intelligence dialogu...

    2025 doi

  45. [54]

    APACrefauthors \ 2018

    lipton2018mythos APACrefauthors Lipton, Z.C. APACrefauthors \ 2018 . The Mythos of Model Interpretability: In machine learning, the concept of interpretability is both important and slippery The mythos of model interpretability: In machine learning, the concept of interpretabi...

    2018 doi

  46. [55]

    APACrefauthors \ 1920

    lukasiewicz1920logice APACrefauthors ukasiewicz, J. APACrefauthors \ 1920 . O logice tr \'o jwarto \'s ciowej O logice tr \'o jwarto \'s ciowej . Ruch Filozoficzny 5 170--171, In Polish

    1920

  47. [56]

    mitchell2019model APACrefauthors Mitchell, M. , Wu, S. , Zaldivar, A. , Barnes, P. , Vasserman, L. , Hutchinson, B. Gebru, T. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Model cards for model reporting Model cards for model reporting . Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, an...

    2019

  48. [57]

    APACrefauthors \ 2024

    moschovakis2024intuitionistic APACrefauthors Moschovakis, J.R. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Intuitionistic logic Intuitionistic logic . E.N. Zalta\ U. Nodelman\ ( ), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy \ ( Summer 2024 \ ). Metaphysics Res...

    2024

  49. [58]

    APACrefauthors \ 2020

    nguyen2020echo APACrefauthors Nguyen, C.T. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles . Episteme 17 2 141--161, APACrefDOI doi:10.1017/epi.2018.32 APACrefDOI

    2020 doi

  50. [59]

    APACrefauthors \ 2012

    palumbo2012epistemic APACrefauthors Palumbo, A. APACrefauthors \ 2012 . Epistemic turn or democratic U-turn? On the tension between philosophical reasoning and political action in deliberative democracy Epistemic turn or democratic U -turn? On the tension between philosophical...

    2012

  51. [60]

    APACrefauthors \ 2011

    parfit2011on APACrefauthors Parfit, D. APACrefauthors \ 2011 . On what matters On what matters \ ( 1). Oxford University Press

    2011

  52. [61]

    APACrefauthors \ 2025 1

    patrascu2025bconstructive APACrefauthors P a tra s cu, A.T. APACrefauthors \ 2025 1 . Constructive symbolic reinforcement learning via intuitionistic logic and goal-chaining inference Constructive symbolic reinforcement learning via intuitionistic logic and goal-chaining infer...

    2025 doi arXiv

  53. [62]

    APACrefauthors \ 2025 2

    patrascu2025aintuitionistic APACrefauthors P a tra s cu, A.T. APACrefauthors \ 2025 2 . Intuitionistic logical framework for dimensionality reduction: A constructive approach to neural network optimization Intuitionistic logical framework for dimensionality reduction: A constr...

    2025 doi

  54. [63]

    APACrefauthors \ 2019

    pearl2019seven APACrefauthors Pearl, J. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . The seven tools of causal inference, with reflections on machine learning The seven tools of causal inference, with reflections on machine learning . Communications of the ACM 62 3 54--60, APACrefDOI doi:10.1145/3...

    2019 doi

  55. [64]

    APACrefauthors \ 2016

    peter2016epistemology APACrefauthors Peter, F. APACrefauthors \ 2016 . The epistemology of deliberative democracy The epistemology of deliberative democracy . K. Lippert-Rasmussen, K. Brownlee \ D. Coady\ ( ), A companion to applied philosophy A companion to applied philosophy...

    2016

  56. [65]

    , Procaccia, A.D

    peters2020explainable APACrefauthors Peters, D. , Procaccia, A.D. , Psomas, A. Zhou, Z. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Explainable voting Explainable voting . Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems Advances in neural information processing systems \ ( 33, \ 1525--1534). Cu...

    2020

  57. [66]

    APACrefauthors \ 1981

    putnam1981reason APACrefauthors Putnam, H. APACrefauthors \ 1981 . Reason, truth and history Reason, truth and history . Cambridge University Press

    1981

  58. [67]

    APACrefauthors \ 1990

    putnam1990craving APACrefauthors Putnam, H. APACrefauthors \ 1990 . The Craving for Objectivity The craving for objectivity . J. Conant\ ( ), Realism with a human face Realism with a human face \ ( \ 120--131). Harvard University Press

    1990

  59. [68]

    APACrefauthors \ 1995

    putnam1995are APACrefauthors Putnam, H. APACrefauthors \ 1995 . Are Moral and Legal Values Made or Discovered? Are moral and legal values made or discovered? Legal Theory 1 1 5--19, APACrefDOI doi:10.1017/S1352325200000045 APACrefDOI

    1995 doi

  60. [69]

    , Fisch, A

    quach2024conformal APACrefauthors Quach, V. , Fisch, A. , Schuster, T. , Yala, A. , Sohn, J.H. , Jaakkola, T.S. Barzilay, R. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Conformal language modeling Conformal language modeling . Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Learning Repres...

    2024

  61. [70]

    APACrefauthors \ 2025

    queloz2025explainability APACrefauthors Queloz, M. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . Explainability through systematicity: The hard systematicity challenge for artificial intelligence Explainability through systematicity: The hard systematicity challenge for artificial intelligence . Mi...

    2025 doi

  62. [71]

    APACrefauthors \ 1993 1

    rawls1993domain APACrefauthors Rawls, J. APACrefauthors \ 1993 1 . The domain of the political and overlapping consensus The domain of the political and overlapping consensus . D. Copp, J. Hampton \ J.E. Roemer\ ( ), The idea of democracy The idea of democracy \ ( \ 245--269)....

    1993

  63. [72]

    APACrefauthors \ 1993 2

    rawls1993political APACrefauthors Rawls, J. APACrefauthors \ 1993 2 . Political liberalism Political liberalism . Columbia University Press

    1993

  64. [73]

    , Bucknall, B

    reuel2024open APACrefauthors Reuel, A. , Bucknall, B. , Casper, S. , Fist, T. , Soder, L. , Aarne, O. others APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Open problems in technical AI governance Open problems in technical AI governance . arXiv preprint, APACrefDOI doi:10.48550/arXiv.2407.14981 APACrefDOI

    2024 doi arXiv

  65. [74]

    \ Blundell, I

    robbins2026losing APACrefauthors Robbins, S. \ Blundell, I. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . Losing our voice? Generative AI and the degradation of human expression Losing our voice? Generative AI and the degradation of human expression . Minds & Machines 36 Article 2, Advanced online ...

    2025 doi

  66. [75]

    \ Patterson, D

    russell2023post APACrefauthors Russell, J.H. \ Patterson, D. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Post-truth and the rhetoric of ``following the science'' Post-truth and the rhetoric of ``following the science'' . Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 35 1--2 122--147, APACref...

    2023

  67. [76]

    , Horta Ribeiro, M

    salvi2025conversational APACrefauthors Salvi, F. , Horta Ribeiro, M. , Gallotti, R. West, R. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . On the conversational persuasiveness of GPT-4 On the conversational persuasiveness of GPT-4 . Nature Human Behaviour 9 1645--1653, APACrefDOI doi:10.1038/s41562...

    2025 doi

  68. [77]

    \ Eliassi-Rad, T

    savcisens2025trilemma APACrefauthors Savcisens, G. \ Eliassi-Rad, T. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . The trilemma of truth in large language models The trilemma of truth in large language models . SSRN Electronic Journal Online only, APACrefDOI doi:10.2139/ssrn.5331504 APACrefDOI

    2025 doi

  69. [78]

    APACrefauthors \ 2014

    scanlon2014being APACrefauthors Scanlon, T.M. APACrefauthors \ 2014 . Being realistic about reasons Being realistic about reasons . Oxford University Press

    2014

  70. [79]

    o delschen Unvollst \

    scholz2006godelschen APACrefauthors Scholz, E. APACrefauthors \ 2006 . Die G \"o delschen Unvollst \"a ndigkeitss \"a tze und das Hilbertsche Programm einer ``finiten'' Beweistheorie Die G \"o delschen Unvollst \"a ndigkeitss \"a tze und das Hilbertsche Programm einer ``finite...

    2006

  71. [80]

    , Boyd, D

    selbst2019fairness APACrefauthors Selbst, A.D. , Boyd, D. , Friedler, S.A. , Venkatasubramanian, S. Vertesi, J. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems . Proceedings of the Conference on Fair...

    2019

  72. [81]

    , Shumaylov, Z

    shumailov2024ai APACrefauthors Shumailov, I. , Shumaylov, Z. , Zhao, Y. , Papernot, N. , Anderson, R. Gal, Y. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data . Nature 631 755--7...

    2024 doi

  73. [82]

    , Yang, K

    song2024lean APACrefauthors Song, P. , Yang, K. Anandkumar, A. APACrefauthors \ 2025 . Lean Copilot : Large Language Models as Copilots for Theorem Proving in Lean Lean Copilot : Large Language Models as Copilots for Theorem Proving in Lean . arXiv preprint, APACrefDOI doi:10....

    2025 doi arXiv

  74. [83]

    \ Griesemer, J.R

    star1989institutional APACrefauthors Star, S.L. \ Griesemer, J.R. APACrefauthors \ 1989 . Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology Institutional ecology, `translations' and boundary object...

    1989 doi

  75. [84]

    , Argyle, L.P

    summerfield2025impact APACrefauthors Summerfield, C. , Argyle, L.P. , Bakker, M. , Collins, T. , Durmus, E. , Eloundou, T. others APACrefauthors \ 2025 . The impact of advanced AI systems on democracy The impact of advanced AI systems on democracy . Nature Human Behaviour 9 12...

    2025 doi

  76. [85]

    APACrefauthors \ 2004

    atten2004brouwer APACrefauthors van Atten, M. APACrefauthors \ 2004 . On Brouwer On Brouwer . Wadsworth/Thomson Learning

    2004

  77. [86]

    APACrefauthors \ 2007

    atten2007brouwer APACrefauthors van Atten, M. APACrefauthors \ 2007 . Brouwer meets Husserl : On the phenomenology of choice sequences Brouwer meets Husserl : On the phenomenology of choice sequences . Springer

    2007

  78. [87]

    APACrefauthors \ 2022

    atten2022dummett APACrefauthors van Atten, M. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Dummett's objection to the ontological route to intuitionistic logic: a rejoinder Dummett's objection to the ontological route to intuitionistic logic: A rejoinder . Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of ...

    2022

  79. [88]

    , Lesner, C

    wang2020using APACrefauthors Wang, W. , Lesner, C. , Ran, A. , Rukonic, M. , Xue, J. Shiu, E. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Using small business banking data for explainable credit risk scoring Using small business banking data for explainable credit risk scoring . Proceedings of th...

    2020 doi

  80. [89]

    APACrefauthors \ 2007

    wedgwood2007nature APACrefauthors Wedgwood, R. APACrefauthors \ 2007 . The nature of normativity The nature of normativity . Oxford University Press

    2007

  81. [90]

    APACrefauthors \ 2000

    williamson2000knowledge APACrefauthors Williamson, T. APACrefauthors \ 2000 . Knowledge and its limits Knowledge and its limits . Oxford University Press

    2000

  82. [91]

    APACrefauthors \ 1992

    wright1992truth APACrefauthors Wright, C. APACrefauthors \ 1992 . Truth and objectivity Truth and objectivity . Harvard University Press

    1992

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.