ArticleInterface focus2012
Laws, causation and dynamics at different levels.
Article in Interface focus, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-Organisation of Prediction Models.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Dynamic and stochastic systems as a framework for metaphysics and the philosophy of science.Synthese · 2021Article
- Asymmetry, Abstraction, and Autonomy: Justifying Coarse-Graining in Statistical Mechanics.The British journal for the philosophy of science · 2020Article
- Article
- Coarse-graining as a downward causation mechanism.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2017Review
- Systems Medicine-Complexity Within, Simplicity Without.Journal of healthcare informatics research · 2017Article
- Re-membering the body: applications of computational neuroscience to the top-down control of regeneration of limbs and other complex organs.Integrative biology : quantitative biosciences from nano to macro · 2015Review
- Quantifying causal emergence shows that macro can beat micro.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013Article
- Identifying mental states from neural states under mental constraints.Interface focus · 2012Article
- Top-down causation and emergence: some comments on mechanisms.Interface focus · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
I have two main aims. The first is general, and more philosophical (§2). The second is specific, and more closely related to physics (§§3 and 4). The first aim is to state my general views about laws and causation at different 'levels'. The main task is to understand how the higher levels sustain notions of law and causation that 'ride free' of reductions to the lower level or levels. I endeavour to relate my views to those of other symposiasts. The second aim is to give a framework for describing dynamics at different levels, emphasizing how the various levels' dynamics can mesh or fail to mesh. This framework is essentially that of elementary dynamical systems theory. The main idea will be, for simplicity, to work with just two levels, dubbed 'micro' and 'macro', which are related by coarse-graining. I use this framework to describe, in part, the first four of Ellis' five types of top-down causation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.