The DOI matches its Crossref record; none of the 9 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
RECENT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF COMMUNICATION
Abstract
,
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Weaver’s 1949 essay interprets Shannon’s mathematical theory of communication, distinguishing technical, semantic, and effectiveness levels and explaining information as entropy/freedom of choice. It argues that the Level A theory is general and suggestive for Levels B and C, while noting its primary applicability to technical transmission.
Key findings
- Communication problems are divided into three levels: Level A, technical accuracy of symbol transmission; Level B, semantic precision of conveyed meaning; and Level C, effectiveness in affecting conduct. The mathematical theory applies “in the first instance only to problem A,” but Weaver argues it overlaps and contributes to B and C.
- Information is not meaning; it measures freedom of choice. A two-choice situation has unit information, called a “bit”; 16 equally free alternatives give 4 bits because log₂16 = 4. The entropy-like expression for information is presented as involving probabilities and logarithms, with H largest when choices are equally probable and zero when one choice is certain.
- English redundancy is “just about 50 per cent.” Shannon estimated that if English had only about 30 per cent redundancy, three-dimensional crossword puzzles would be possible; noiseless telegraphy could save about half the time by proper encoding, but remaining redundancy helps combat noise.
- Shannon’s noisy-channel theorem states that if channel capacity C is equal to or larger than source entropy H(x), coding can transmit with arbitrarily low error; if C is less than H(x), it is impossible to reduce error frequency as low as desired, and equivocation is always at least H(x) − C. For continuous signals, a T-second signal band-limited from 0 to W can be completely specified by 2TW numbers.
Methods
- This is an expository/interpretive essay in three main sections; Weaver is responsible for the first and third sections, while the middle section interprets mathematical papers by Claude E. Shannon.
- No empirical sample or data are used; the paper states results “without any proofs and with a minimum of mathematical terminology.”
- The main analysis is conceptual: it defines a communication system, information/entropy, channel capacity, coding, noise, continuous messages, and then discusses the interrelation of Levels A, B, and C.
Limitations
- Stated: the mathematical theory applies in the first instance only to Level A; Levels B and C would require additions such as a “semantic receiver” and “semantic noise.” Weaver also states that semantic understanding cannot be completely clarified in finite time by further talk alone.
- Stated: for arbitrary noise, Shannon does not derive one explicit formula for channel capacity but obtains upper and lower limits; continuous-case results are “necessarily somewhat less specific.”
- Evident: the text is a non-mathematical exposition without proofs or new empirical evidence, relying on Shannon’s results and Weaver’s interpretation.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
50 Own interpretation · 9 Sources not found · 2 No basis given · 1 Not checked yet
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the limiting case where one probability is unity (certainty) and all the others zero (impossibility), then H is zero (no uncertainty at all-no freedom of choice-no information).”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus any limitations discovered in the theory at Level A necessarily apply to levels B and C.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Levels B and C can make use only of those signal accuracies which turn out to be possible when analyzed at Level A.
In the paper
“If one is concerned, as in a simple case, with a set of n independent symbols, or a set of n independent complete messages for that matter, whose probabilities of choice are p 1 , p 2 . . . pn , then the actual expression for the information is”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shannon
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If it has only 20 per cent of freedom, then it would be impossible to construct crossword puzzles in such complexity and number as would make the game popular.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus the theory of Level A is, at least to a significant degree, also a theory of levels B and C.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The analysis at Level A discloses that this level overlaps the other levels more than one could naively suspect.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Just as soon as one message becomes more probable than the other ( p 1 greater than p 2, say), the value of H decreases.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When the number of cases is fixed, we have just seen that then the information is the greater, the more nearly equal are the probabilities of the various cases.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“To those who have studied the physical sciences, it is most significant that an entropy-like expression appears in the theory as a measure of information.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shannon
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For rather perversely it happens that as one makes the coding more and more nearly ideal, one is forced to longer and longer delays in the process of coding.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This kind of coding leads, by the fundamental theorem above, to the maximum rate C / H for the transmission of symbols.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 28
- It may state two separate claims as one. 15
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the capacity of a channel is to be described not in terms of the number of symbols it can transmit, but rather in terms of the information it transmits.”
- Also stated in: § 2.3 Capacity of a Communication Channel · p. 7 · plain
“the capacity of a channel is to be described in terms of its ability to transmit what is produced out of source of a given information.”
- Also stated in: § 2.3 Capacity of a Communication Channel · p. 7 · plain
“in the general case, capacity measures not the number of symbols transmitted per second, but rather the amount of information transmitted per second, using bits per second as its unit.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Also stated in: § 2.3 Capacity of a Communication Channel · p. 7 · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That information be measured by entropy is, after all, natural when we remember that information, in communication theory, is associated with the amount of freedom of choice we have in constructing messages.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However clever one is with the coding process, it will always be true that after the signal is received there remains some undesirable (noise) uncertainty about what the message was; and this undesirable uncertainty-this equivocation-will always be equal to or greater than H ( x ) -C .”
- Also stated in: § 2.5 Noise · p. 9 · plain
“Furthermore, there is always at least one code which is capable of reducing this undesirable uncertainty, concerning the message, down to a value which exceeds H ( x ) -C by an arbitrarily small amount.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 2.5 Noise · p. 9 · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If it has complete freedom, then every array of letters is a crossword puzzle.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If noise is introduced, then the received message contains certain distortions, certain errors, certain extraneous material, that would certainly lead one to say that the received message exhibits, because of the effects of the noise, an increased uncertainty.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The theorem states that by devising proper coding procedures for the transmitter it is possible to transmit symbols over the channel at an average rate 5 which is nearly C / H , but which, no matter how clever the coding, can never be made to ex-”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Shannon has estimated that if the English language had only about 30 per cent redundancy, then it would be possible to construct three-dimensional crossword puzzles.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shannon
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the channel capacity C is equal to or larger than H ( x ) , then by devising appropriate coding systems, the output of the source can be transmitted over the channel with as little error as one pleases. However small a frequency of error you specify, there is a code which meets the demand.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Apart from more serious implications, which again we will postpone to our final discussion, it is interesting to note that a language must have at least 50 per cent of real freedom (or relative entropy) in the choice of letters if one is to be able to construct satisfactory crossword puzzles.”
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is generally true that when there is noise, the received signal exhibits greater information-or better, the received signal is selected out of a more varied set than is the transmitted signal.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This sort of consideration leads at once to the necessity of characterizing the statistical nature of the whole ensemble of messages which a given kind of source can and will produce.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Now it turns out that when a channel does have certain constraints of this sort, which limit complete signal freedom, there are certain statistical signal characteristics which lead to a signal entropy which is larger than it would be for any other statistical signal structure, and in this important case, the signal entropy is exactly equal to the channel capacity.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If there were no noise, then there would be no uncertainty concerning the message if the signal is known.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the information source has any residual uncertainty after the signal is known, then this must be undesirable uncertainty due to noise.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“so that about half of the letters or words we choose in writing or speaking are under our free choice, and about half (although we are not ordinarily aware of it) are really controlled by the statistical structure of the language.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In particular, information must not be confused with meaning.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shannon
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The real reason that Level A analysis deals with a concept of information which characterizes the whole statistical nature of the information source, and is not concerned with the individual messages (and not at all directly concerned with the meaning of the individual messages) is that from the point of view of engineering, a communication system must face the problem of handling any message that”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a similar way, the theory contributes to the problem of translation from one language to another, although the complete story here clearly requires consideration of meaning, as well as of information.”
boostedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This means, of course, that the theory is sufficiently imaginatively motivated so that it is dealing with the real inner core of the communication problemwith those basic relationships which hold in general, no matter what special form the actual case may take.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“Similarly, the ideas developed in this work connect so closely with the problem of the logical design of great computers that it is no surprise that Shannon has just written a paper on the design of a computer which would be capable of playing a skillful game of chess.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shannon
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“For the case of arbitrary noise, rather than the special 'white thermal' noise assumed above, Shannon does not succeed in deriving one explicit formula for channel capacity, but does obtain useful upper and lower limits for channel capacity. And he also derives limits for channel capacity when one specifies not the average power of the transmitter, but rather the peak instantaneous power.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shannon
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is an evidence of this generality that the theory contributes importantly to, and in fact is really the basic theory of cryptography which is, of course, a form of coding.”
boostedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The concept of the information to be associated with a source leads directly, as we have seen, to a study of the statistical structure of language; and this study reveals about the English language, as an example, information which seems surely significant to students of every phase of language and communication.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is a theory so general that one does not need to say what kinds of symbols are being consideredwhether written letters or words, or musical notes, or spoken words, or symphonic music, or pictures.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Finally it should be stated that Shannon obtains results which are necessarily somewhat less specific, but which are of obviously deep and sweeping significance, which, for a general sort of continuous message or signal, characterize the fidelity of the received message, and the concepts of rate at which a source generates information, rate of transmission, and channel capacity, all of these being”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shannon
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Very roughly one may say that the extended theory is somewhat more difficult and complicated mathematically, but not essentially different.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The idea of utilizing the powerful body of theory concerning Markoff processes seems particularly promising for semantic studies, since this theory is specifically adapted to handle one of the most significant but difficult aspects of meaning, namely the influence of context.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus when one moves to levels B and C, it may prove to be essential to take account of the statistical characteristics of the destination.”
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The theory is deep enough so that the relationships it reveals indiscriminately apply to all these and to other forms of communication.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a second point, it seems clear that an important contribution has been made to any possible general theory of communication by the formalization on which the present theory is based.”
boostedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It was suggested that the mathematical theory of communication, as developed by Shannon, Wiener, and others, and particularly the more definitely engineering theory treated by Shannon, although ostensibly applicable only to Level A problems, actually is helpful and suggestive for the level B and C problems.”
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The concept of information developed in this theory at first seems disappointing and bizarre-disappointing because it has nothing to do with meaning, and bizarre because it deals not with a single message but rather with the statistical character of a whole ensemble of messages, bizarre also because in these statistical terms the two words information and uncertainty fi nd themselves to be”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“was justified in indicating that the interrelation of the three levels is so considerable that one's final conclusion may be that the separation into the three levels is really artificial and undesirable.”
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is almost certainly true that a consideration of communication on levels B and C will require additions to the schematic diagram on page 3, but it seems equally likely that what is required are minor additions, and no real revision.”
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More likely, and again by direct analogy, if you overcrowd the capacity of the audience you force a general and inescapable error and confusion.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper relies on this without support.
Levels B and C can make use only of those signal accuracies which turn out to be possible when analyzed at Level A.
“Part of the significance of the new theory comes from the fact that levels B and C, above, can make use only of those signal accuracies which turn out to be possible when analyzed at Level A.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The analysis at Level A discloses that this level overlaps the other levels more than one could naively suspect.
“But a larger part of the significance comes from the fact that the analysis at Level A discloses that this level overlaps the other levels more than one could possibly naively suspect.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Communication either affects conduct or is without any discernible and probable effect at all.
“But with any reasonably broad definition of conduct, it is clear that communication either affects conduct or is without any discernible and probable effect at all.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 2.4 Coding · p. 7
“accepting signals from a source of entropy (or information) of H bits per second.”
§ 2.4 Coding · p. 7
“The entropy H here measures information per symbol, so that the ratio of C to H measures symbols per second.”
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Knowledge Base Identification and Adaptation for End-to-End Semantic Communication
Zhang, Y., Huang, J., Wang, J., et al. (2026) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2026.3712337
“However, they seldom consider the actual content or intent of the data [6], resulting in low e ffi ciency in utilizing resources such as spectrum and energy.”
Performance Analysis of Semantic Communication Over DF Relay Channel
Sahariya, P., Garg, P., & Sharma, P. K. (2026) · IEEE Wireless Communications Letters · doi:10.1109/lwc.2026.3725693
“Although this idea is not completely new, three levels of communication problems have been discussed in [5].”
Semantic Channel Capacity of Nakagami-m Fading Channels Based on Synonymous Mapping
Han, Y., Niu, K., Sun, Y., et al. (2026) · IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT) · doi:10.1109/isit62367.2026.11653645
“However, as noted by Weaver [2], communication involves three levels of problems: technical (Level A), semantic (Level B), and effectiveness (Level C).”
Hasan, S., Ratul, R. H., Mahadi, M. K., Fahim, A.-H., & Mehereen, N. (2026) · IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society · doi:10.1109/ojcoms.2026.3727863
“Over seventy years ago, Weaver [24] formulated communication as a three-level problem: Level A concerns the technical accuracy of signal transmission, Level B addresses the conveyance of desired meaning , and Level C focuses on the e ff ectiveness of that meaning in achieving an intended outcome at…”
CMASC: Channel Model-Driven Adaptive Semantic Communication for V2X Networks
Qi, X., Ma, N., Wu, J., Liang, W., & Zhang, P. (2026) · IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering · doi:10.1109/tnse.2026.3732500
“As an innovative paradigm, semantic communication directly extracts and transmits the semantic connotation of information [3], [4], [5], [6].”
Agentic Semantic Communication: Concepts, Architectures, and Visions
Seon, J., Lee, S., Kim, J. Y., Sun, Y. G., Seo, H., Bennis, M., Kim, D. I., & Kim, J. Y. (2026) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2026.3735868
“S INCE the beginning of communication, researchers have envisioned devices as intelligent agents capable of understanding context and communicating intent without human intervention [1].”
InfluentialBER-Driven Semantic Resilience and Receiver-Side Recovery for Text Communication
Panebianco, D., Beritelli, L., Amico, S. A., Avanzato, R., & Beritelli, F. (2026) · International Conference on Networks, Computers and Communications (ICNCCom) · doi:10.1109/icnccom69117.2026.11736256
“In several operational settings, exact bit recovery is less important than preserving the information required for a correct decision [2, 4–6].”
Metadata
- Authors
- Weaver, W.
- Affiliations
- Rockefeller Foundation (US)
- Corresponding author
- Weaver, Warren
- Venue
- ETC: A Review of General Semantics
- Publisher
- Institute of General Semantics
- Published
- 2017-01-01
- Volume
- 74
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 136-157
- ISSN
- 0014-164X (ISSN-L)
- 2168-9245
- OpenAlex
- W7203678441
- Semantic Scholar
- c4ee686f5dd14ac83c4b10a8bce9a62341ea0a3a
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ETC.: A Review of General Semantics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Diverse Interdisciplinary Research Studies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Error Correcting Code Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
- Keywords
- mathematical theory of communication, information theory, Claude Shannon
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
