The development of nineteenth-century geodetic measurement challenges the dominant coherentist account of metric success. Coherentists argue that measurements of a parameter are successful if their numerical outcomes convergence across varying contextual constraints. Aiming at numerical convergence, in turn, offers an operational aim for scientists to solve problems of coordination. Geodesists faced such a problem of coordination between two indicators of the earth's polar flattening, which were both based on imperfect ellipsoid models. While not achieving numerical convergence, their measurements produced novel data that grounded valuable theoretical hypotheses. Consequently, they ought to be regarded as epistemically successful. This insight warrants a dynamic revision of coherentism, which allows to judge the success of a metric based on both its coherence and fruitfulness. On that view, scientific measurement aims to coordinate theoretical definitions and produce novel data and theoretical insights.

19 世纪大地测量的发展挑战了主流的连贯论者对度量成功的解释。连贯主义者认为，如果参数的数值结果在不同的上下文约束下收敛，则参数的测量是成功的。反过来，以数值收敛为目标，为科学家解决协调问题提供了一个操作目标。大地测量学家面临着地球极地扁平化的两个指标之间的协调问题，这两个指标都基于不完美的椭球模型。虽然没有实现数值收敛，但他们的测量产生了新的数据，这些数据基于有价值的理论假设。因此，它们应该被认为在认知上是成功的。这种洞察力需要对连贯性进行动态修订，它允许根据其连贯性和成果性来判断指标的成功与否。根据这种观点，科学测量旨在协调理论定义并产生新颖的数据和理论见解。