01 / RESEARCH ARCHITECTURE

Six connected pillars. One cumulative research program.

Each pillar defines a distinct research object while contributing evidence, models, and criticism to a shared account of civilizational stability and development.

The six pillars are not six isolated theories. They divide a large research object into testable programs while sharing evidence standards, variables, models, and correction mechanisms.

6Research pillars

40Core volumes

7Foundational books

33Open volumes

Stability · cooperation · trust · effective energy · entropy

Civilizational Physics

HYPOTHESIS STATUS

Core question

Under what conditions do cooperation, trust, effective energy, and entropy jointly shape the stability, adaptability, and failure of civilizational systems?

Research object

Dynamic relationships among cooperation networks, trust fields, usable resource and information capacity, institutional coordination, entropy-like losses, thresholds, shocks, adaptation, and collapse across multiple scales.

Initial hypothesis

Civilizational stability may be constrained by interacting bottlenecks rather than a single dominant cause. The working expression S = (C × Lₑ × Eₙ) / E proposes directional and multiplicative relationships that must be tested against additive, threshold, network, and competing models.

Research methods

Dynamical systemsNetwork scienceMulti-agent simulationTime-series analysisCausal inferenceComparative history

Related works

Foundations of Civilization Science
Hu’s Civilizational Physics

Open research tasks

01
Operationalize C, Lₑ, Eₙ, E, and S at different scales
02
Compare multiplicative, additive, threshold, and network formulations
03
Build transparent cross-system time-series and event datasets
04
Identify counterexamples, reversals, and boundary conditions
05
Calibrate and independently replicate dynamic models

Indicators · benchmarks · fragility · forecasting · systemic risk

Measurement and Early Warning

HYPOTHESIS STATUS

Core question

Which observable signals reveal rising systemic fragility early enough to support responsible action without creating false certainty?

Research object

Measurement systems for stability and fragility; indicator validity; critical transitions; cascading risk; warning horizons; forecast calibration; uncertainty; false alarms; missed events; and decision thresholds.

Initial hypothesis

Combinations of declining cooperation and trust, constrained adaptive capacity, rising coordination loss, and changing system dynamics may precede some breakdowns. Any warning model must demonstrate incremental, out-of-sample value over simple baselines.

Research methods

Indicator designChange-point detectionSurvival and hazard modelsHistorical backtestingForecast evaluationScenario and uncertainty analysis

Related works

Civilizational Collapse Warning System
Foundations of Civilization Science

Open research tasks

01
Develop a versioned Benchmark 20 evidence set
02
Pre-register event definitions, horizons, and warning thresholds
03
Test lead time, calibration, false positives, and false negatives
04
Compare statistical, machine-learning, and transparent baseline models
05
Run independent regional and historical replications

Identity · memory · relationships · contribution · legacy

Life Continuity

HYPOTHESIS STATUS

Core question

How can identity, memory, relationships, contribution, and legacy continue across time while protecting dignity, consent, privacy, plurality, and the right to be forgotten?

Research object

Life-course records, family and social memory, digital continuity, contribution histories, inheritance and stewardship, posthumous representation, identity rights, consent, access, preservation, and intergenerational transmission.

Initial hypothesis

Well-governed continuity infrastructure may strengthen recognition, relationship continuity, and intergenerational learning; without consent, revocation, security, and plural governance, the same infrastructure may produce surveillance, distortion, or control.

Research methods

Longitudinal studiesEthnography and oral historyHuman–computer interactionPrivacy and security analysisInstitutional comparisonEthical and legal analysis

Related works

Life as Enduring Value
Foundations of Civilization Science

Open research tasks

01
Define measurable forms of identity, memory, contribution, and continuity
02
Design consent, revocation, access, inheritance, and deletion protocols
03
Evaluate psychological, relational, and social outcomes
04
Compare cultural and legal models of remembrance and digital legacy
05
Test preservation, provenance, authenticity, and misuse safeguards

Delegation · multi-agent systems · verification · markets · governance

Human–Agent Coordination

HYPOTHESIS STATUS

Core question

How should humans and AI agents delegate, coordinate, verify, learn, transact, and allocate responsibility and value?

Research object

Human–agent economic units, delegated authority, task markets, multi-agent coordination, verification, agent identity, incentive design, platform rules, auditability, alignment, liability, and institutional governance.

Initial hypothesis

Bounded, verifiable delegation with explicit human authority, audit trails, contestability, and aligned incentives may improve coordination. Opaque autonomy, unverifiable outputs, concentrated control, and adversarial incentives may increase agentic entropy and systemic risk.

Research methods

Multi-agent simulationMechanism designBehavioral experimentsFormal specification and verificationSecurity red teamingGovernance and legal analysis

Related works

AI Agent Economics
Civilizational Proof of Contribution

Open research tasks

01
Create a taxonomy of delegation, authority, and responsibility
02
Build open human–agent coordination benchmarks
03
Test incentive compatibility, collusion, manipulation, and failure cascades
04
Develop verification, audit, appeal, and shutdown protocols
05
Evaluate labor, power, welfare, and distributional consequences

Meaningful contribution · recognition · agency · continuity · value

Meaning Economics

HYPOTHESIS STATUS

Core question

When intelligence and production become abundant, what remains scarce and valuable, and how do contribution, recognition, agency, and continuity shape experienced meaning?

Research object

Meaningful contribution, recognition, trust, agency, belonging, temporal continuity, meaning entropy, non-price value, post-labor institutions, cultural variation, and the relationship between subjective meaning and social contribution.

Initial hypothesis

Value may emerge partly from meaningful contribution rather than consumption or price alone. Recognition, trusted relationships, agency, and continuity may support meaning, but their effects are expected to vary across persons, cultures, and institutions.

Research methods

Construct and scale developmentSurveys and panel studiesBehavioral and field experimentsInstitutional analysisCross-cultural comparisonLongitudinal causal designs

Related works

Meaning Economics
Life as Enduring Value

Open research tasks

01
Operationalize meaningful contribution, recognition, agency, and meaning entropy
02
Validate measures across languages, cultures, ages, and social roles
03
Test causal relationships among contribution, recognition, trust, and well-being
04
Study AI-mediated work, abundance, displacement, and purpose
05
Compare institutional designs for post-labor value and participation

Evidence · attribution · impact · recognition · trusted records

Contribution and Value

HYPOTHESIS STATUS

Core question

How can real contribution be documented, attributed, evaluated, and recognized without reducing human value to wealth, power, popularity, or a tradable score?

Research object

Contribution evidence, provenance, attribution, causal impact, collaborative credit, verifiable credentials, reputation, dispute resolution, privacy, anti-gaming controls, governance, and long-term contribution records.

Initial hypothesis

Transparent evidence chains, plural evaluation, contestable attribution, and verifiable credentials may improve recognition and coordination. No universal score can fully represent human value, and any contribution system is vulnerable to gaming, capture, and measurement harm.

Research methods

Evidence provenanceCausal impact evaluationNetwork and attribution modelsVerifiable credentialsMechanism and incentive designAudit, red teaming, and ethics review

Related works

Civilizational Proof of Contribution
Meaning Economics

Open research tasks

01
Develop a plural contribution ontology and evidence schema
02
Test individual and collaborative attribution methods
03
Design privacy-preserving credentials and selective disclosure
04
Red-team gaming, collusion, metric capture, and exclusion risks
05
Build appeal, correction, expiry, and multi-stakeholder governance protocols

One cumulative research program

Work in one pillar should strengthen or challenge the others. Shared infrastructure prevents the program from becoming a collection of disconnected claims.

Common definitions

Maintain a versioned glossary, units of analysis, scale assumptions, and boundary conditions.

Open evidence

Connect claims to sources, datasets, transformations, code, limitations, and correction histories.

Competing models

Publish baselines, alternatives, negative results, failed replications, and adversarial counterexamples.

Ethical constraints

Protect dignity, agency, privacy, rights, cultural plurality, and intergenerational responsibility.

Independent review

Separate authorship, replication, peer review, data audit, and decision authority where possible.

Versioned synthesis

Revise cross-pillar conclusions only when changes and their evidentiary consequences are documented.

Current status: a developing research architecture. The six pillars organize questions and hypotheses; they do not certify scientific validity. Progress depends on measurement, criticism, replication, correction, and replacement.