首页> 外文期刊>Eurasian Soil Science >A Mathematical Comparison of Classification Structures: The Case of the USDA Soil Taxonomy
【24h】

A Mathematical Comparison of Classification Structures: The Case of the USDA Soil Taxonomy

机译:分类结构的数学比较:以美国农业部土壤分类学为例

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Biologists have not paid much attention to the mathematical structures of biological classifications and their interpretations. A few have made such an analysis mainly using statistical distribution models. Comparisons with nonbiological classifications are needed to know if such structures are the result of biological evolution or of taxonomic practices, utilitarian bias, and/or subconscious cognitive rules. We compare the biological classification of a target group of soil borne plant parasitic nematodes (the Tylenchina suborder) with a non-biological one (the USDA 8th edition of the Keys to Soil Taxonomy). The authors made use of the same tools used in previous papers by biologists introducing other classifications. The results show that both taxonomies are information systems that try to optimize the information flow and fit well to the same distribution models. The analysis does not show any idiosyncrasies of biological classifications with respect to pedological ones, thus, supporting the idea that these products are the result of subconscious cognitive rules used by humankind to classify the world.
机译:生物学家并未对生物学分类的数学结构及其解释给予过多关注。少数人主要使用统计分布模型进行了这种分析。需要与非生物分类进行比较,以了解这种结构是否是生物进化或生物分类实践,功利偏见和/或潜意识认知规则的结果。我们比较了目标群体的土壤传播植物寄生线虫(泰伦次亚目)与非生物目标分类(美国农业部第8版《土壤分类法》)的生物学分类。作者使用了生物学家介绍其他分类的先前论文中使用的相同工具。结果表明,两种分类法都是试图优化信息流并很好地适合相同分布模型的信息系统。该分析没有显示出与儿童学分类有关的任何生物学分类特质,因此支持以下观点:这些产品是人类用于对世界分类的潜意识认知规则的结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号