Pith. Sign in

RECORD

A partial defense of algebraic relationalism

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
Lu Chen

History and Philosophy of Physics · Submitted 7 Sep 2023

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim I defend algebraicism, according to which physical fields can be understood in terms of their structural relations without reference to a spacetime manifold, as a genuine relationalist view against the conventional wisdom that it is equivalent to substantivalism, according to which spacetime exists fundamentally.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID2309.03622 (version 2)
Pith IDICSDWZU2, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationLu Chen. "A partial defense of algebraic relationalism." arXiv:2309.03622 (2023). https://pith.science/paper/ICSDWZU2
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,004 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.15 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.05 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.02 · compares with prior results 0.84 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

I defend algebraicism, according to which physical fields can be understood in terms of their structural relations without reference to a spacetime manifold, as a genuine relationalist view against the conventional wisdom that it is equivalent to substantivalism, according to which spacetime exists fundamentally. I criticize the standard version of algebraicism that is considered equivalent to substantivalism. Furthermore, I present alternative examples of algebraicism that better implement relationalism with their conceptual advantages over substantivalism or its standard algebraic counterpart.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 I defend algebraicism, according to which physical fields can be understood in terms of their structural relations without reference to a spacetime manifold, as a genuine relationalist view against the conventional wisdom that it is equivalent to substantivalism, according to which spacetime exists fundamentally. contribution 0.98 0.79 0.83 asserted 1.00
s1 I criticize the standard version of algebraicism that is considered equivalent to substantivalism. contribution 1.00 0.88 0.07 asserted 0.99
s2 Furthermore, I present alternative examples of algebraicism that better implement relationalism with their conceptual advantages over substantivalism or its standard algebraic counterpart. contribution 1.00 0.90 0.24 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: position or commentary 1.00 · evidence from argument 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v2
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

I defend algebraicism, according to which physical fields can be understood in terms of their structural relations without reference to a spacetime manifold, as a genuine relationalist view against the conventional wisdom that it is equivalent to substantivalism, according to which spacetime exists fundamentally. I criticize the standard version of algebraicism that is considered equivalent to substantivalism. Furthermore, I present alternative examples of algebraicism that better implement relationalism with their conceptual advantages over substantivalism or its standard algebraic counterpart.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.