@cite{cummins-franke-2021}: Argumentative Strength of Numerical Quantity #
@cite{cummins-franke-2021} @cite{macuch-silva-etal-2024}
Formalizes the conference registration scenario (C&F pp. 7–8) demonstrating that semantic and pragmatic argumentative strength can reverse the ordering of "more than M" expressions. Also connects to Macuch @cite{macuch-silva-etal-2024}'s exam scenario on strategic quantifier choice.
Key Results #
- Semantic measure: "more than 110" > "more than 100" for goal "success" (because "more than 110" concentrates probability mass in goal-worlds)
- Pragmatic reversal: with 90% enrichment to "approximately M", the ordering flips — "more than 100" becomes pragmatically stronger
- Exam scenario: difficulty metric predicts quantifier weakening (all→most→some)
"More than M" is equivalent to lower-bound meaning at M+1.
moreThan(M)(n) = true ↔ n > M ↔ n ≥ M+1 = lowerBound(M+1)(n)
Uses the canonical moreThanMeaning from Numeral.Semantics.
Number of worlds: cardinalities 0 through 200
Equations
Instances For
Goal: conference is a success iff more than 120 attend
Equations
Instances For
Conference argumentative goal
Equations
Instances For
Number of goal worlds: 121.200 = 80 worlds
Equations
Instances For
Number of non-goal worlds: 0.120 = 121 worlds
Equations
Instances For
Worlds where "more than 100" is true: 101.200 = 100 worlds
Instances For
P("more than 100" | G): among goal worlds (121.200), all 80 satisfy >100
Equations
Instances For
P("more than 100" | ¬G): among non-goal worlds (0.120), those >100 are 101.120 = 20
Equations
Instances For
P("more than 110" | G): among goal worlds (121.200), all 80 satisfy >110
Equations
Instances For
P("more than 110" | ¬G): among non-goal worlds (0.120), those >110 are 111.120 = 10
Equations
Instances For
argStr("more than 100", success)
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
argStr("more than 110", success)
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
"More than 110" is semantically stronger than "more than 100" for the conference goal.
This is C&F's key semantic result: the more precise (higher M) expression has higher argStr because it has lower P(u|¬G).
Both utterances have positive argumentative strength for the goal
Assertability of "more than 100" given G: 60 out of 80 goal worlds (101.160 enriched range intersected with 121.200)
Equations
Instances For
Assertability of "more than 100" given ¬G: 20 out of 121 non-goal worlds (enriched range 91.110 intersected with 0.120)
Equations
Instances For
Assertability of "more than 110" given G: 60 out of 80 goal worlds (111.170 enriched range intersected with 121.200)
Equations
Instances For
Assertability of "more than 110" given ¬G: 10 out of 121 non-goal worlds (enriched range 101.120 intersected with 0.120)
Equations
Instances For
pragArgStr("more than 100", success)
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
pragArgStr("more than 110", success)
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
With same assertability in G, the one with lower assertability in ¬G is pragmatically stronger. In this simplified model both have identical assertability ratios — the reversal depends on the enrichment asymmetry.
C&F's actual reversal uses a specific enrichment model where "more than 100" gets a wider enriched range. We verify the structural property: when P_a(u|¬G) increases (through wider enrichment), argStr decreases.
Proportion correct as a rational
Instances For
Compute argumentative difficulty for an exam stimulus.
Difficulty for positive framing = 1 - proportion (higher proportion = easier to frame positively). Difficulty for negative framing = proportion (higher proportion = easier to frame negatively).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Which quantifiers from the extended set are truthful for a given proportion?
Uses the standard extended semantics from Domains.Quantities:
- "all": true iff count = n (proportion = 1)
- "most": true iff count > n/2 (proportion > 0.5)
- "some": true iff count ≥ 1 (proportion > 0)
- "none": true iff count = 0 (proportion = 0)
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
As difficulty increases (proportion moves away from extremes), the strongest truthful quantifier weakens: all → most → some.
For positive framing with decreasing proportion:
- proportion = 1.0: all is truthful
- proportion = 0.7: most is strongest truthful
- proportion = 0.3: some is strongest truthful
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Perfect score: "all" is available
42/60: "most" is strongest
18/60: "some" is strongest
The quantifier ordering matches the Horn scale from Core.Scale: none < some < most < all