Language Is an Insufficient Substrate for Quantitative Reasoning, and Consequential Domains Need Large Quantitative Models

Counts differ because each database indexes a different set of publications. We treat OpenAlex as the canonical count; Google Scholar is not shown (no API, and crawling it violates its ToS).

The prevailing assumption in applied machine learning is that progress on consequential quantitative decisions such as pricing risk, allocating capital, triaging patients, or containing a network intrusion will follow from progress in large language models (LLMs). A language model is trained on a representation of the world that was produced by human description; description is a lossy encoding of the quantitative record, and the loss is irreversible: no downstream model, at any scale, can recover from a description what the description did not encode. We formalize this as a property of the representation on which a model is trained rather than of the model capacity, and we identify three further properties that consequential settings demand of a model and that a language substrate cannot supply by construction: reproducibility, lineage from every output back to the source records that produced. it, and calibrated uncertainty. We argue that these properties define a distinct model class, which we call the Large Quantitative Model (LQM).