Open Scientific Review Architecture ​

The Science of Fabric Reality operates an open, structured scientific review architecture. External researchers, mathematicians, and physicists are invited to audit definitions, examine proof targets, reproduce numerical simulations, and submit formal claim challenges.

text
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                      PEER REVIEW & CRITIQUE TAXONOMY                        │
├──────────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ Review Tier                  │ Operational Definition                       │
├──────────────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 1. SELF_REVIEW               │ Internal invariant and claim-boundary audit  │
│ 2. OPEN_CRITIQUE             │ Public inspection of code, proofs & ledgers │
│ 3. FORMAL_PEER_REVIEW        │ Structured manuscript critique by specialists│
│ 4. PUBLICATION_PEER_REVIEW   │ External journal/conference refereeing       │
│ 5. INDEPENDENT_REPLICATION   │ Third-party laboratory & solver replication  │
└──────────────────────────────┴──────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Epistemic Rule: Review Demarcation

To avoid status inflation, internal audits and open public comments are designated as SELF_REVIEW and OPEN_CRITIQUE. The status FORMAL_PEER_REVIEW or PUBLICATION_PEER_REVIEW is reserved exclusively for structured external referee processes.

1. Structured Review Tracks ​

Track A: Mathematics Audit ​

  • Target Domain: Metric-measure Dirichlet forms, self-adjoint operator resolvents, and Lean 4 formalization targets.
  • Key Artifacts:
    • Formalization Roadmap
    • [Lean 4 Verification Sources](file:///c:/gilc.us.mesh.repos/ivanpasev.com/docs/04-mathematics/lean/)
    • [Proof Candidate Registry (formal-proof-registry.json)](file:///c:/gilc.us.mesh.repos/ivanpasev.com/reports/current/formal-proof-registry.json)
  • Focus Questions:
    1. Is the non-perturbative continuum limit strictly bounded?
    2. Does the adm_composition lemma in Lean 4 contain hidden axiomatic dependencies?

Track B: Theoretical Physics Review ​

  • Target Domain: The Fabric Field Equations (FFE), Fractal Quantum Field Theory (FQFT), and the PHYSICA variational canon.
  • Key Artifacts:
  • Focus Questions:
    1. Does the FFE constrained variational system preserve energy-momentum conservation under covariant differentiation?
    2. Are lepton mass fits properly demarcated as P2 Calibrated Retrodictions (DOF=0)?

Track C: Metrology & Experimental Evidence ​

  • Target Domain: 7-fold uncertainty decomposition (UNUM to UREF), NIST ASD atomic spectroscopic anchors, PTB directional emissivity baselines, and GUM/VIM standards.
  • Key Artifacts:
  • Focus Questions:
    1. Are comparator baselines strictly separated from empirical validation claims?
    2. Is the active P4 sealed prediction count strictly zero?

Track D: Code & Computational Reproduction ​

  • Target Domain: Automated test execution, RFC 8785 metadata hashes, and visual QA telemetry.
  • Key Artifacts:

2. Formal Claim Challenge Protocol ​

The corpus provides a deterministic pathway for submitting formal scientific counterexamples or empirical discrepancies:

text
[CLAIM CHALLENGE WORKFLOW]
1. Identify Target Claim ID (e.g. THM-INV-01, OBS-LPFR-01, FQFT-R1)
2. Formulate Mathematical Counterexample OR Empirical Discrepancy
3. Specify Supporting Peer-Reviewed Citation / SI Traceable Dataset
4. Submit Challenge via Open Research Portal
5. Log Challenge in Public Research Errata & Update Claim Boundaries
  • Challenge Acceptance Policy: Any mathematically sound counterexample or peer-reviewed empirical contradiction is logged publicly in the corpus errata, and the affected claim boundary is downgraded or retracted immediately.

3. Canonical Continuations ​

Explore → Scientific Results Ledger\boxed{\text{\bf References → } \text{\href{/science/references}{Reference Atlas & Bibliographic Authority}}}