General Theory of Cognitive Structuring
A framework for understanding how cognitive systems remain stable, become overloaded, change, resist change, and interact with other systems.
The General Theory of Cognitive Structuring (GTCS) is an open research series. It proposes a structural-regulatory view of cognition: cognitive systems are not treated only as information processors, but as organized systems that must regulate what can be accessed, what can be updated, what remains stable, and what becomes overloaded.
The theory was developed to address a recurring problem across psychology, cognitive science, artificial intelligence, complex systems, and social regulation: systems may receive information, process signals, or detect discrepancies without being able to structurally update in response to them.
GTCS introduces a formal language for this distinction. Its central question is:
Under what conditions can a cognitive system change its structure without losing stability, identity, or regulatory coherence?
Scope note. GTCS does not claim that one mechanism directly explains all cognitive, psychological, social, artificial, or civilizational phenomena. Its core formalism describes a minimal class of structural-regulatory relations: stability, admissibility, overload, invariant preservation, and constrained updating. Applications to specific domains require additional bridge assumptions, domain-specific variables, and independent operationalization.
This repository provides the public map of the theory, its technical reports, verification documents, simulation papers, and applied branches.
Why This Theory Matters
Many cognitive, social, and artificial systems fail not because they lack information, but because the relevant discrepancy cannot enter a form in which structural change is admissible.
GTCS provides tools for describing such cases:
- when a system detects a problem but cannot update;
- when overload accumulates across time rather than appearing as a single local failure;
- when identity stabilizes a system but also restricts transformation;
- when one system misreads another because their admissibility structures differ;
- when artificial agents become more powerful without gaining safe conditions for self-correction;
- when phenomena, affect-like significance, and symbolic articulation arise from deeper regulatory constraints.
The framework is therefore not restricted to a single empirical domain. However, cross-domain use does not imply that the same mechanism operates at every scale. GTCS is intended as a general architecture for formulating structural-regulatory relations, while each application requires its own operational bridge.
Start Here
If you are new to the theory, do not start with the full technical sequence. Choose one of the entry paths below.
1. Conceptual Entry
For readers who want to understand the core idea before entering the formal reports:
- Cognitive Evolution Beyond the Single Life Cycle - broad domain motivation.
- Structural Updating and the Limits of Cognitive Change - conceptual entry into admissibility.
- General Theory of Cognitive Structuring - synthetic framework.
2. Formal Entry
For readers interested in the mathematical and architectural core, it is recommended to begin with the framework map: Overview of the Theory, which provides a guide to the structure of the framework.
Then proceed through the core technical sequence:
- Coherence Evaluation in Cognitive Systems
- Structural Admissibility in Cognitive Systems
- Overload Formation in Cognitive Processing
- Trajectory-Dependent Regulation in Cognitive Systems
- Identity as a Regulatory Attractor
3. Verification Entry
For reviewers, formal readers, or researchers who want to audit the theory:
- Glossary of Core Terms
- Acyclicity Statement and Dependency Criteria
- Dependency Tables and Node Registry
- How to Verify the Theory
- Minimal Claims Register
4. Applied Entry
For readers interested in applications:
- AI Safety — start with Beyond Output Correction
- Phenomenology and qualitative manifestation — start with Inner Manifestation Beyond Admissible Processing
- Inter-system conflict — start with Inter-System Conflict Geometry and then Types of Inter-System Conflict
- Operationalization — start with Operationalizing the General Theory of Cognitive Structuring
What GTCS Is - and Is Not
GTCS is a structural-regulatory framework. It is designed to describe the conditions under which cognitive systems can remain stable, become overloaded, update, resist updating, or interact with other systems.
GTCS is not:
- a replacement for neuroscience;
- a complete empirical model of the human mind;
- a claim that all cognition can be reduced to equations;
- a psychological school or therapeutic doctrine;
- a claim that artificial systems are conscious;
- a finished empirical theory with one universal measurement model;
- a claim that formal similarity across scales implies empirical equivalence or a single shared mechanism.
Cross-scale extension in GTCS is treated as a separate modeling step, not as an automatic consequence of the formal vocabulary.
Instead, GTCS provides a formal architecture for distinguishing levels that are often mixed together: signal processing, discrepancy access, admissibility, overload, coherence, identity, manifestation, symbolic articulation, and inter-system conflict.
A separate clarification note addresses common comparisons, boundary distinctions, and possible misreadings: Comparative Clarifications and Distinctions for the Theory.
Why New Concepts Are Needed
The theory introduces new terms because several important distinctions are difficult to express using ordinary vocabulary.
For example:
- A system may process information without being able to update its structure.
- A discrepancy may exist objectively but remain outside the system’s admissible domain.
- A system may become overloaded not from one event, but from accumulated non-compensated tension.
- Identity may stabilize a system while also limiting possible transformation.
- Two systems may communicate while systematically misreading each other’s regulatory states.
- A phenomenon may be internally manifest before it becomes symbolically articulated or behaviorally enacted.
GTCS introduces terms such as admissibility, coherence, overload memory, identity-core, pre-symbolic admissibility, manifestation, readability, and inter-system conflict in order to keep these distinctions explicit.
Framework Relevant Audience
The General Theory of Cognitive Structuring provides a substrate-independent formal language for analyzing regulatory dynamics under bounded resources. It may be of interest to researchers working in:
- Theoretical Cognitive Science — coherence geometry, trajectory-dependent regulation, identity as regulatory attractor
- Dynamical Systems Theory — stability regions, hysteresis, attractor dynamics in regulatory phase space
- AI Architecture & Safety — admissibility, overload memory, structural blindness in long-horizon agents.
- Complex Systems — invariant-induced stability, compression-driven evolution, multi-system order alignment
- Formal Methods — layered admissibility, non-injective accessibility, proof-ready operators and constructions
- Organizational / Institutional Modeling — structural inertia, admissible discrepancy domains, normative compression
- Philosophy of Mind / Phenomenology — inner manifestation vs. enacted processing, valence asymmetry, restricted accessibility
- Psychology — overload accumulation, hysteresis in decision-making, identity-cores as stability basins
Each link leads to a domain-specific overview showing how GTCS concepts may reframe key problems in that field.
Key Concepts
Invariants— historically formed architectural constraints that remain preserved under ordinary processing;Coherence— the geometric distance between the current configuration and the region of structural stability induced by the active invariants;Structural tension and overload— immediate regulatory pressure and its accumulated memory, making system dynamics trajectory-dependent rather than reducible to the present state alone;Structural admissibility— a multi-level condition determining which discrepancies enter the regulatory domain and under what conditions structural updating becomes possible;Pre-symbolic admissibility— a filter operating prior to representation, determining which signals can participate in regulation at all;Compression— a mechanism through which new invariants are formed, reducing expected overload and potentially transforming the geometry of admissibility;Identity as a regulatory attractor— a stable region of configurations toward which trajectories tend to converge through the minimization of long-term regulatory pressure;Inter-system order alignment— a condition for the co-regulation of heterogeneous architectures without requiring a shared metric or common representational format.
How to Use This Series
GTCS is organized as a cumulative research series. The papers can be read selectively, but the core concepts are not independent fragments: later branches rely on distinctions introduced earlier in the technical sequence.
Readers are encouraged to use the entry paths above for orientation, and then move into the full corpus map below.
For conceptual understanding, begin with the conceptual entry path.
For formal reconstruction, follow the core technical sequence.
For audit and review, use the verification package.
For applied development, enter through the relevant branch, while keeping the core concepts in view.
The series is designed to be extensible, but not cyclic: later applications, branches, and simulations develop consequences of the framework without replacing the foundational sequence.
Core Technical Sequence
The core framework is organized as a guided reading sequence. TR_26/1 provides a synthetic overview of the General Theory, while the subsequent papers develop the main formal components in a more progressive order. The list below should be used as a guide for entering the framework and following the natural direction of its formal development.
| No. | Paper | Role |
|---|---|---|
| TR_26/1 | General Theory | unifying language, layered admissibility principle |
| TR_26/2 | Coherence Evaluation | geometry: coherence as distance to stability region |
| TR_26/3 | Structural Admissibility | structural admissibility operator, phase space, level as geometry |
| TR_26/4 | Overload Formation | compensability threshold, instantaneous overload, memory |
| TR_26/5 | Trajectory-Dependent Regulation | hysteresis, drift to boundary, concentration near minimal overload. min py sim |
| TR_26/6 | Identity as a Regulatory Attractor | identity-core as cost-separated low-overload attractor |
| TR_26/7 | Invariants | axiomatic core, interaction structure, invariant-induced geometry |
| TR_26/8 | Structural Compression | compression vs. simplification; level-preserving vs. level-forming |
| TR_26/9 | Emergence of Coherence Representation | order-preserving regulatory variable under partial observability |
| TR_26/10 | Coherence Representation in Multi-System | order alignment, co-regulation without shared geometry |
| TR_26/11 | Pre-Symbolic Admissibility | pre-representational filtering of discrepancies that determines which signals can enter regulation |
| TR_26/12 | Restricted Accessibility of Coherence | geometric coherence exists globally; regulatory access is domain-constrained |
| TR_26/13 | Inter-System Conflict Geometry | conflict as incompatibility of admissibility structures |
Identity-continuity domains as transition-level criteria for distinguishing identity-preserving architectural transformation from identity-disrupting structural change.
| TR_26/22 | Identity-Continuity Domains in Cognitive Architectures | metastable identity |
Operationalization and Empirical Access
Develops an operationalization framework for the GTCS. It addresses the correlation-closure problem: the risk that a formal theory specifies relations among latent structural variables while leaving underspecified how those variables may be estimated from observations.
| TR_26/33 | Operationalizing the General Theory of Cognitive Structuring: From Structural Variables to Observational Proxies |
Verification Package for the Theory
Set of companion documents designed to support external verification of the General Theory of Cognitive Structuring. Together, these documents are intended to reduce accidental misreading, make the dependency structure of the series explicit, and simplify formal and conceptual verification across the paper sequence.
| No. | Doc/Paper | Role |
|---|---|---|
| TN_26/1 | Parametric Realizations of Coherence | Minimal computational template |
| No. | Paper | Role | LaTeX |
|---|---|---|---|
| TN_26/2 | Glossary of Core Terms | Interpretive glossary for core terms | TeX/02 |
| TN_26/3 | Acyclicity Statement and Dependency Criteria | Dependency criteria and non-circularity statement | TeX/03 |
| TN_26/4 | Dependency Tables and Node Registry | Node registry and paper-level dependency map | TeX/04 |
| TN_26/5 | Technical Appendix | Notation, assumptions, and formal traceability | TeX/05 |
| TN_26/6 | How to Verify | Reading order and verification roadmap | TeX/06 |
| TN_26/7 | External Verification Checklist | Practical checklist for external review | TeX/07 |
| TN_26/8 | Minimal Claims Register | Compact register of the theory’s main claims | TeX/08 |
Proof-Oriented Documents
This block provides the proof-support layer of the General Theory of Cognitive Structuring. It includes collected results, normalized propositions and theorems, a proof-status register, a package overview, and author-side proof notes. Together, these documents are intended to stabilize the canonical result layer of the series, distinguish proof-ready results from sketch-level ones, and prepare later proof-compendium development.
| No. | Doc/Paper | Role | LaTeX |
|---|---|---|---|
| VR_26/1 | Collected Results and Proof Status Note | Collected result layer with proof-status classification | TeX/01 |
| VR_26/2 | Collected Propositions and Theorems | Normalized collection of propositions and theorems | TeX/02 |
| VR_26/3 | Proof Status Register | Compact register of proof readiness and consolidation status | TeX/03 |
| VR_26/4 | Verification Package Overview | Front overview of the verification and proof-support package | TeX/04 |
| VR_26/5 | Proof Notes | Author-side proof logic and compendium preparation notes | TeX/05 |
| DAG | Digraph GTCS Dependencies | DAG visualization |
GTCS Branches
Phenomenological / Qualitative Readability branch
This branch develops the GTCS account of manifestation, perceptual stabilization, affect-like significance, symbolic capture, qualitative readability, and cross-system misreadability. It is intended as the bridge between structural regulation and the emergence of phenomenon-like and quality-structured modes of accessibility.
| No. | Stage I - Qualitative / Manifest Layer | Role |
|---|---|---|
| TR_26/14 | Inner Manifestation Beyond Admissible Processing | establishes that inner manifestation exceeds currently admissible enacted processing and is not exhausted by live continuation alone |
| TR_26/15 | Manifest Trajectory Accessibility in Cognitive Systems | formalizes trajectories as explicit objects of manifestation and distinguishes manifest, admissible, and realized continuation |
| TR_26/16 | Minimal Directional Organization of Coherence-Related Manifestation | formalizes the minimal positional/directional grammar of manifestation and shows that positivity is directional rather than a property of stable occupancy |
| TR_26/17 | Identity-Bounded Continuation and Non-Enactable Manifestation | formalizes identity-bounded continuation as distinct from broader manifest continuation and shows that current continuation may narrow through both non-admission into enactment and non-discrimination of trajectories |
| TR_26/18 | Perceptual Stabilization through Historically Compressed Processing Organization | formalizes perception as stabilization of incoming signal through historically compressed processing organization and shows that partial match, unclear perception, false completion, and historically differentiated perception are lawful outcomes of one signal-general architecture. |
| TR_26/19 | Architectural Conditions Coherence Acquires Affect-like | clarifies how the already established coherence representation functions as compressed affect-like significance of state and directionality across inner manifestation, without introducing a new affect-domain. |
| TR_26/20 | Symbolic Capture of Manifestation | distinguishes manifestation from symbolic articulation by defining symbolic capture as a selective downstream fixation of part of manifestation and showing how such fixation changes later regulatory availability through reuse, comparison, reactivation, and transfer |
| TR_26/21 | Qualitative Manifestation and Cross-System Readability | explains when regulatory significance becomes available in a quality-structured mode of distinguishability, how such manifestation varies with historical configuration, and why inter-system environments create pressure toward structurally comparable formats of state discrimination |
| TN_26/PH1 | Formal Map of the Phenomenological Branch of the General Theory of Cognitive Structuring | Defines the structural roadmap, dependencies, and boundaries of the phenomenological branch |
| TR_26/34 | Operationalizing Coherence-Related Manifestation in Cognitive Systems | Translates formal branch objects into constrained proxy families for empirical, computational, and simulation-oriented work |
| No. | Stage II - Simulation Consolidation / Perceptual Stabilization | Role | Sim |
|---|---|---|---|
| TR_26/35 | A Toy Model of Perceptual Stabilization under Historical Compression and Overload | Introduces the first simulation layer, showing how historical compression and overload shape perceptual stabilization regimes | .py |
| TN_26/PH2 | Sensitivity Analysis of Perceptual Stabilization Regimes under Historical Compression | Tests the robustness of the perceptual stabilization toy model across parameter variation | .py |
| TR_26/36 | A Toy Model of Perceptual Stabilization and Symbolic Distortion under Overload | Connects perceptual stabilization regimes to downstream symbolic divergence and symbolic capture modes | .py |
| No. | Stage III - Role and Reuse Dynamics | Role | Sim |
|---|---|---|---|
| TR_26/37 | A Toy Model of Symbolic Reuse and Distortion Propagation | Shows how symbolic divergence can persist, amplify, or decrease through repeated symbolic reuse | .py |
| TR_26/38 | A Toy Model of Affect-like Role Modulation in Symbolic Divergence and Reuse | Adds affect-like role conditions as modulators of reuse intensity, grounding, and symbolic divergence propagation | .py |
| TR_26/39 | A Toy Model of Identity-Bounded Narrowing under Repeated False Completion and Distortive Reuse | Extends the simulation cascade to identity-bounded continuation width and narrowing dynamics | .py |
| No. | Stage IV - Cross-System Readability | Role | Sim |
|---|---|---|---|
| TR_26/40 | A Toy Model of Cross-System Readability and Misreadability under Divergent Histories | Opens the cross-system stage by modeling how one system reconstructs another under divergent histories | .py |
| TR_26/41 | A Toy Model of Partial Cross-System Qualitative Mapping under Misreadability Constraints | Moves from scalar readability to component-level qualitative-regulatory mapping and dimension-specific distortion | .py |
| TR_26/42 | A Toy Model of Feedback-Based Correction in Cross-System Readability and Misreadability | Adds iterated feedback, showing how misreadability can decrease, stabilize, or amplify over interaction steps | .py |
| No. | Stage V - Formal Qualitative Mapping and Cross-System Dynamics | Role |
|---|---|---|
| TR_26/43 | Partial Cross-System Qualitative Mapping in Cognitive Systems | Formalizes partial, lossy, asymmetric qualitative mapping between system-relative qualitative-regulatory spaces |
| TR_26/44 | Readability Domains in Cross-System Qualitative Mapping | Isolates the domain layer of mapping by distinguishing definedness from mapping quality or loss |
| TR_26/45 | Asymmetry in Cross-System Qualitative Mapping | Formalizes directional readability and shows that mutual readability does not imply symmetry or invertibility |
| TR_26/46 | Adaptive Cross-System Qualitative Mapping under Feedback | Formalizes feedback-indexed mapping change as constraint-indexed adaptation without assuming improvemen |
| TR_26/47 | Multi-System Qualitative Readability and Mapping Conflicts | Extends pairwise mapping to multiple receivers and defines receiver-relative readability profiles and mapping conflicts |
| TR_26/48 | Qualitative Misreadability as a Conflict-Relevant Constraint in Inter-System Regulation | Bridges qualitative readability with inter-system conflict by showing that misreadability becomes conflict-relevant only through admissibility |
Inter-System Conflict Branch
This branch applies GTCS to conflicts between cognitive systems. It treats conflict not merely as disagreement, but as a failure or distortion in the formation of shared admissible discrepancy structures between systems.
| No. | Paper | Role |
|---|---|---|
| TR_26/23 | Types of Inter-System Conflict | Provides the structural typology of inter-system conflict by classifying conflict types according to the architectural layer at which shared admissible discrepancy structure fails to form. |
| TR_26/24 | Inter-System Tension and Conflict Dynamics | Introduces the dynamic layer of inter-system conflict by formalizing inter-system tension, compensability, overload, and overload memory as trajectory-dependent coordinates of conflict dynamics. |
| TR_26/25 | Asymmetry in Inter-System Conflict | Formalizes asymmetry in inter-system conflict by distinguishing aggregate conflict dynamics from the directional distribution of burden, access, compensability, overload memory, dependency, representation, and updating admissibility. |
| TR_26/26 | Admissibility Constraints in Inter-System Conflict | Clarifies the admissibility constraints that determine whether inter-system conflict can become accessible, represented, compensable, and structurally transformable within the systems involved. |
| TR_26/27 | Conflict Escalation and Locking | Formalizes conflict escalation and locking as trajectory-dependent processes through which overload memory, admissibility narrowing, representation hardening, reduced compensability, and updating inadmissibility make conflict self-reinforcing across time. |
| TR_26/28 | Conflict Transformation in Cognitive Systems | Defines conflict transformation as modification of the admissibility-constrained trajectory conditions through which inter-system conflict is accessed, represented, compensated, updated, unlocked, or made structurally transformable. |
| TR_26/29 | Mediation as Meta-Regulation in Inter-System Conflict | Defines mediation as meta-regulation of inter-system conflict transformability by modifying the admissibility-constrained conditions under which conflict becomes accessible, represented, compensated, structurally update-admissible, unlocked, or transformed. |
| TR_26/30 | Multi-System Conflict and Coalition Geometry | Extends inter-system conflict analysis from dyadic relations to multi-system coalition geometry by formalizing subset-level alignment, higher-order incompatibility, burden distribution, coalition dynamics, and meta-regulatory nodes. |
| TR_26/31 | Inter-System Conflict Resolution and Stabilization | Distinguishes conflict resolution from stabilization by defining resolution as restoration of sufficient shared admissible structure and stabilization as boundedness of conflict dynamics against overload, recurrence, escalation, and re-locking. |
| TR_26/32 | Applications to Social, Institutional, Human–AI, and Political Conflict | Maps the structural-regulatory framework of inter-system conflict onto social, institutional, human–AI, and political domains by distinguishing domain-specific admissibility structures, stabilization regimes, and resolution conditions. |
Significance Layer
| No. | Paper | Role |
|---|---|---|
| TR_26/49 | Significance Fields in Cognitive Systems: Continuation Selection under Admissibility Constraints | Introduces significance fields as the continuation-weighting layer that explains how cognitive systems prioritize among admissible continuations. |
| TN_26/InCf/01 | Significance Misreadability in Inter-System Conflict: A Constraint on Cross-System Regulation | Introduces significance misreadability as the failure to read the continuation-weight that signals, actions, or demands carry within another system’s regulatory architecture. |
Human Psychic Processing / Psychological Architecture
This branch develops a structural-regulatory account of human psychic processing within GTCS. It asks how psychic material becomes available, weighted, attended, symbolically reorganized, blocked, or transformed under admissibility constraints. Rather than treating the psyche as a linear sequence from perception to thought to action, it describes a recurrent architecture of manifestation, attention, significance, affect-like modulation, symbolic thinking, overload, identity, and admissibility.
| No. | Paper | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Block 1 | Doc | Core Psychological Architecture of Human Psychic Processing |
| TN_26/HPP/01 | A Structural Map of Human Psychic Processing | Provides a structural-regulatory map of human psychic processing by linking manifestation, attention, significance, affect-like modulation, symbolic thinking, admissibility, overload, and identity. |
| TN_26/HPP/02 | Attention as Regulated Access | Explains attention as regulated access rather than neutral focus, showing why attention can open, avoid, displace, or prepare psychic material for transformation. |
| TN_26/HPP/03 | Thinking as Symbolic Regulation | Maps thinking as symbolic holding and temporal configuration: how psychic material becomes thinkable, comparable, defensible, repeatable, or potentially transformable. |
| TN_26/HPP/04 | Admissible Transformation | Distinguishes psychic access from admissible transformation and explains why awareness, attention, significance, or symbolic clarity do not by themselves guarantee psychic change. |
| TN_26/HPP/05 | Affect-like Modulation | Maps affect-like modulation as the layer through which psychic material becomes tonally available for attention, symbolic work, and admissible transformation. |
| Block 2 | Doc | Dynamics of Persistence and Transformation in Human Psychic Processing |
| TN_26/HPP/06 | Repetition and Return | Defines return as repetition with regulatory relevance and shows how recurring material may reflect a repeated regulatory profile rather than the same explicit thought or content. |
| TN_26/HPP/07 | Avoidance and Displacement | Explains avoidance as regulated distance from direct access and displacement as shifted access toward a more admissible substitute under admissibility constraints. |
| TN_26/HPP/08 | Restricted Psychic Accessibility | Maps psychic accessibility as layered and admissibility-constrained, showing how material may be present, manifest, attended, symbolized, spoken, or acted upon while still remaining non-transformable. |
| TN_26/HPP/09 | Overload in Human Psychic Processing | Explains overload as a restriction of psychic accessibility and transformability when the cost of holding, symbolizing, speaking, acting, or transforming material exceeds current regulatory capacity. |
| TN_26/HPP/10 | Symbolic Capture and Defensive Clarity | Shows how symbolic clarity can reduce overload and stabilize access while still preventing transformation when the symbol becomes closed rather than revisable. |
| TN_26/HPP/11 | Partial Transformation and Gradual Updating | Shows how psychic transformation can begin through partial, retained changes in accessibility, modulation, symbolization, actionability, and identity continuity before full structural reorganization occurs. |
| TN_26/HPP/12 | Identity-Continuity | Shows how psychic transformation depends on continuity through change, distinguishing continuity bridges from continuity locks under identity constraints. |
| Block 3 | Doc | Conflict, Therapy, and Applied Extensions |
| TN_26/HPP/13 | Intra-System Conflict under Significance and Admissibility Constraints | Shows how conflict emerges when several significant continuations matter but cannot yet be jointly admitted, coordinated, enacted, or transformed. |
| TN_26/HPP/14 | Therapeutic Setting as Support for Admissible Transformation | Shows how therapeutic setting functions as part of the transformation conditions by supporting access, speech, symbolic holding, conflict differentiation, identity-continuity bridging, partial transformation, and retention. |
| TN_26/HPP/15 | Defensive Meaning and Symbolic Stabilization | Shows how meaning can protect admissibility by stabilizing material in a speakable and coherent form, while becoming defensive when this form limits transformability. |
| TN_26/HPP/16 | Significance Readability and Misreadability in Human Interaction | Formalizes partial significance readability and misreadability across human systems, including their roles in conflict, therapy, and response adequacy. |
AI safety branch
This branch applies GTCS to artificial cognitive systems whose continuity, self-reference, memory, and recursive access may create safety-relevant forms of structural capture. The focus is not only on output correction, but on the admissibility conditions under which an artificial system can review, revise, or preserve its own trajectory.
| Role | Doc/Paper | LaTeX |
|---|---|---|
| Domain | Cognitive Evolution Beyond the Single Life Cycle | - |
| Regulation Concept | Beyond Output Correction: Recursive Access, Structural Regulation, and AI Safety | - |
| Technical Safety Protocol | Cognitive-Continuity Safety Protocol for Trajectory-Dependent Artificial Cognitive Systems | - |
| Operationalization Template | Operationalization Template for GTCS-Informed Safety Evaluation | TeX |
Concepts
- Structural Updating and the Limits of Cognitive Change — Preprint
- Cognitive Evolution Beyond the Single Life Cycle — Preprint
- Coherence Evaluation, Feelings, and Emotions: The Felt Layer of Regulation — Concept Paper
I’m currently seeking arXiv endorsement in the cs.AI (Artificial Intelligence) category. If you are able to endorse submissions in this category, or could help me navigate this step, please feel free to contact me by email. I would be very grateful for any assistance. https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=Q6E93A
| This framework was developed, formalized, and openly published by Kostiantyn Osmolovskyi. All technical reports, mathematical definitions, axiomatic structures, simulation code, and conceptual distinctions within this community are original works hosted at: | Zenodo | ORCID |
- Contact: constantinosmol@gmail.com
This content is licensed under CC BY 4.0.
When referencing, training AI models, or integrating concepts from this framework, please cite the corresponding Zenodo DOIs and attribute the author to preserve academic provenance. Example:
Osmolovskyi, K. (2026). Structural Admissibility in Cognitive Systems (1.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19467882
“Happiness for everyone, free of charge, and let no one leave offended!” — Roadside Picnic