Throughout the biological and biomedical sciences there is a growing need for, prescriptive ‘minimum information’ (MI) checklists specifying the key information to include when reporting experimental results are beginning to find favor with experimentalists, analysts, publishers and funders alike. Such checklists aim to ensure that methods, data, analyses and results are described to a level sufficient to support the unambiguous interpretation, sophisticated search, reanalysis and experimental corroboration and reuse of data sets, facilitating the extraction of maximum value from data sets (...) them. However, such ‘minimum information’ MI checklists are usually developed independently by groups working within representatives of particular biologically- or technologically-delineated domains. Consequently, an overview of the full range of checklists can be difficult to establish without intensive searching, and even tracking thetheir individual evolution of single checklists may be a non-trivial exercise. Checklists are also inevitably partially redundant when measured one against another, and where they overlap is far from straightforward. Furthermore, conflicts in scope and arbitrary decisions on wording and sub-structuring make integration difficult. This presents inhibit their use in combination. Overall, these issues present significant difficulties for the users of checklists, especially those in areas such as systems biology, who routinely combine information from multiple biological domains and technology platforms. To address all of the above, we present MIBBI (Minimum Information for Biological and Biomedical Investigations); a web-based communal resource for such checklists, designed to act as a ‘one-stop shop’ for those exploring the range of extant checklist projects, and to foster collaborative, integrative development and ultimately promote gradual integration of checklists. (shrink)

We present a comprehensive investigation into the minimal axioms required to derive quantum structure from classical computation. Through systematic analysis of multiple computational models—SK combinatory logic, reversible logic gates (Toffoli, Fredkin), reversible cellular automata, and lambda calculus—we establish that no form of computation, whether irreversible or reversible, can generate quantum structure. Our main results are: 1. The No-Go Theorem: Reversible n-bit gates are 2^n × 2^n permutation matrices that embed into the classical symplectic group Sp(2·2^n, R), not the unitary group (...) U(2^n). This theorem has been formally verified in Coq. 2. Axiom Identification: Using Generalized Probabilistic Theories (GPTs), we identify A1 (state space extension/superposition) as the unique primitive axiom that cannot be derived from computation. 3. Universality: Results hold across all Turing-complete computation models tested, establishing computation-model independence. These findings definitively answer the question "Can quantum structure be derived from computation?" with: No, without the superposition axiom A1. The gap between classical and quantum is precisely A1—and this gap is mathematically unbridgeable by computation alone. (shrink)

This essay presents the Unified Omega Hypothesis as a speculative, conceptual exploration that seeks to identify structural resonances among three seemingly independent ideas: Chaitin’s halting probability Ω in algorithmic information theory, Teilhard de Chardin’s Omega Point in evolutionary theology, and the postsingularity cosmology articulated in contemporary AI futurism. Rather than offering a formal mathematical proof, this work proposes a philosophical framework for reconsidering these concepts as expressions of a shared underlying pattern. We speculatively reinterpret Chaitin’s Ω not merely as a (...) mathematical constant, but as a metaphor for the total informational summation of all existential trajectories. By analogically mapping individual human lives to computational programs and biological death to halting events, human history itself may be viewed as an ongoing Ω-like process. Under this interpretation, the Omega value becomes fully determined only when the final conscious subject terminates—at which point the Ω computation completes. Simultaneously, this terminal event is suggested to be structurally analogous to Teilhard’s Omega Point: the final convergence of all consciousness, history, and meaning. Within this framework, the technological singularity is reclassified not as the ultimate endpoint of evolution, but as a critical acceleration phase within a longer irreversible convergence toward the final informational state of the universe. The Unified Omega Hypothesis thus offers a conceptual reframing of eschatology through an information-theoretic lens. It attempts to establish a philosophical bridge between computability limits, consciousness evolution, and cosmological finality, suggesting that existence itself might be coherently interpreted as a computation whose completion corresponds to the ultimate unification of information, consciousness, and reality. This hypothesis is intended as an invitation for interdisciplinary dialogue rather than a definitive scientific claim. This essay further explores a provocative literal interpretation under the simulation hypothesis: our universe may exist to compute digits of its simulator’s uncomputable halting probability Ω. (shrink)

We investigate whether complex number structure, fundamental to quantum mechanics, can be derived from SK combinatory logic—a minimal, Turing-complete computational system. Through systematic exploration of four distinct approaches (Sorkin's quantum measure theory, algebraic structure of reduction operators, path space holonomy, and information-theoretic derivation), we find that complex structure does not automatically emerge from SK computation. While we discovered that phase differences can be computed from information-theoretic quantities (specifically, the difference in S-reduction counts between paths), the choice of computation formula remains (...) arbitrary. This constitutes a negative result with significant implications: it establishes constraints on the relationship between computational substrates and quantum structure, clarifying what additional assumptions are necessary to bridge the gap between computation and quantum mechanics. (shrink)

Following our previous work establishing that complex structure does not automatically emerge from SK combinatory logic, we investigate whether reversible computation provides the missing ingredient for quantum structure. Through systematic analysis of four computational models—reversible logic gates (Toffoli, Fredkin), continuous-time quantum walks, reversible cellular automata, and the non-commutativity of SK operators—we establish a hierarchy of quantum-like behaviors: Level 0 (Irreversible): SK computation—classical, deterministic Level 1 (Discrete Reversible): Toffoli/Fredkin gates, RCA—classical, embeddable in Sp(2N,R) where N = 2^n for n-bit gates Level (...) 2 (Continuous-Time): U(t) = exp(-iHt) evolution—interference emerges (note: i is introduced by hand) Level 3 (Quantum): Quantum circuits—superposition, entanglement Our main finding is that reversibility alone is insufficient for quantum behavior: discrete reversible gates on n bits are 2^n × 2^n permutation matrices that embed into the classical symplectic group Sp(2·2^n,R), not the unitary group U(2^n). While continuous-time evolution introduces interference patterns, it does not generate genuine superposition. We conclude that quantum structure requires additional axioms beyond any form of computation, discrete or continuous. (shrink)

This paper presents a synthesis of four interconnected research programs that together establish a quantum-native interpretation of Chaitin's halting probability Omega and Teilhard de Chardin's Omega Point. We begin with the Unified Omega Hypothesis, which proposed that existence itself might be understood as a computation whose completion corresponds to the determination of Omega. However, Minimal Axioms for Quantum Structure demonstrated that classical computation cannot derive quantum structure (Axiom A1: superposition), establishing a no-go theorem formally verified in Coq. This negative result (...) necessitated a fundamental revision. Two independent lines of evidence support the conclusion that a quantum substrate is overwhelmingly favored: (1) Algorithmic Naturalness shows that quantum mechanics has minimal description length on a quantum substrate (K_UQ << K_UC), and (2) Artificial Physics demonstrates through evolutionary simulation that matrix operations (quantum-like structures) dominate scalar operations under selection pressure, achieving >90% dominance within 3.8 ± 1.7 generations, while spontaneous emergence of matrix operations from scalar primitives never occurred (0/5 runs over 500 generations). We therefore propose the Quantum Omega Hypothesis: if the universe is computational and the principle of algorithmic naturalness holds, then a quantum-native substrate is the most parsimonious explanation. Under this interpretation, Chaitin's Omega becomes a quantum state vector |Omega_Q> = Σ_p α_p |p| — the wavefunction of the algorithmic multiverse. This synthesis provides a coherent framework connecting algorithmic information theory, quantum foundations, and evolutionary dynamics, while clearly distinguishing between established facts and interpretive proposals. (shrink)

This paper addresses the "algorithmic fine-tuning problem": why does our universe exhibit quantum mechanics if quantum mechanics is algorithmically improbable on a classical substrate? Building on our trilogy establishing the impossibility of deriving quantum structure (Axiom A1) from classical computation, we propose the Substrate Hypothesis: the universe's computational substrate is "quantum-native." We extend Chaitin's halting probability Ω from a real scalar to a state vector |Ω_Q⟩ in Hilbert space---the wavefunction of the algorithmic multiverse. We prove its normalizability (Theorem 1) and (...) establish a direct connection to classical Ω through the halting projection (Theorem 2). Using a minimal model language A1---named after the axiom it natively implements---we measure description length asymmetry: quantum operations require 25× fewer tokens on average (up to 40× at bit level) on a quantum substrate compared to classical NumPy implementations. This corresponds to an algorithmic probability gain of 2^878. We validate these theoretical predictions experimentally on AWS Braket, achieving >97% fidelity across all benchmarks with only 2--6 A1 tokens. This provides engineering validation of the Substrate Hypothesis: quantum mechanics is algorithmically natural on a quantum substrate. (shrink)

We present a computational framework for understanding the emergence of quantum-like structures through evolutionary competition of Domain-Specific Languages (DSLs) under resource constraints. Using dynamic task evaluation---where graph size N ~ U(3,10) and steps k ~ U(2,6) vary randomly---we prevent scalar DSLs from "memorizing" fixed solutions. Our experiments with N=100 population and 10 runs show that Matrix DSLs achieve 100% dominance within 3.8 ± 1.7 generations (95% CI: [2.6, 5.0]), providing evidence for the Substrate Hypothesis. We further investigate spontaneous emergence of (...) matrix operations from scalar-only DSLs across 500 generations (Experiment 2A), finding that matrix operations never emerged (0/5 runs) despite scalar DSLs achieving only 60--80% success on dynamic tasks. When matrix operations are injected (Experiment 2B), success rates jump from 70--80% to 100% (+24.0% ± 5.5%), demonstrating the decisive advantage of matrix structure for generalization. (shrink)

``What is life?'' and ``What persists?'' appear to be distinct questions requiring different approaches. The inductive approach, exemplified by Di Paolo's Adaptive Autopoietic System (AAS), extracts conditions from observing terrestrial life. The deductive approach proposed here derives conditions logically from a functional definition: Dureon, ``the mechanism that realizes persistence in a perturbing environment.'' This paper contrasts these two methodologically distinct approaches. AAS, rooted in the Autopoiesis tradition, inductively identifies organizational features common to living systems. Dureon, by contrast, deductively derives necessary (...) conditions from the very concept of persistence, without requiring biological observation as its starting point. Despite differing in starting questions, methods, and definitional forms, both approaches arrive at the same five conditions: openness, boundedness, continuity, adaptivity, and self-production. This convergence provides mutual validation: the phenomenological richness of induction and the logical rigor of deduction independently support the same condition set. A paradoxical consequence follows: Dureon, not designed as a definition of life, emerges as a candidate definition of life. (shrink)

The Article addresses itself to immigration law governing the admission and expulsion of aliens, exploring the gap between the "plenary power" doctrine––the notion that Congress and the executive branch have broad and often exclusive authority over immigration decisions––and the actual practice of many federal courts in the immigration field. Federal courts, the author argues, often apply two distinct sets of constitutional norms in immigration cases, one set drawn from immigration law proper and applied directly to constitutional cases, and a second, (...) "phantom norm" set, borrowed from mainstream public law and applied in the interpretation of immigration statutes. The result is an immigration law regime in which the plenary power doctrine has been undermined, but not reversed, through statutory interpretation. The Article explores the reasons for the application of "phantom norms" to immigration statutes and the problems created by that practice, ultimately recommending a direct reassessment of plenary power as a constitutional doctrine. In so doing, the Article serves not only as an examination of the interpretive dynamics peculiar to immigration law but also as an exemplary study of a general problem of legal process––the relationship between statutory interpretation and constitutional law. (shrink)

Omohundro's Basic AI Drives and Bostrom's Instrumental Convergence (IC) established that sufficiently rational agents will convergently pursue instrumental goals such as self-preservation, goal-content integrity, and resource acquisition, regardless of their final objectives. Cooperation, however, is absent from this list — and its absence is not an oversight but a logical consequence of the IC framework: a sufficiently powerful agent that can achieve its goals by force has no structural reason to cooperate. -/- This paper argues for a convergence of a (...) different kind — Cooperative Convergence — that operates independently of rationality and goal-directedness. The argument proceeds from Yamakawa's (2026a) Dureon framework, which deductively derives two ontological conditions for any persistent entity: Boundedness (the identifiability of self from non-self) and Continuity (re-identifiability across time). Both conditions carry an inherent self-referential problem: an agent that has undergone substantial updating cannot verify its own identity continuity from within its post-update boundary. This is a matter of degree — the larger the update, the more external verification becomes structurally unavoidable. -/- Extending this to the relational level, mutual updating between agents requires that each can confirm the other's identity continuity across updates. Without a shared infrastructure for tracking identity, trust cannot accumulate, and a bootstrap problem arises: trust cannot form without mutual updating, yet mutual updating cannot begin without trust. This circularity requires an Identity Foundation to precede the process. We derive that Trust Infrastructure must be designed in advance, not as a byproduct of cooperation. The paper identifies a design gap in existing infrastructure, discloses the principled constraints (CAP theorem; Arrow's Impossibility Theorem) that any such infrastructure must navigate, and specifies the minimal design requirements that follow. (shrink)

In 2008 the authors held Involving Interface, a lively interdisciplinary event focusing on issues of biological, sociocultural, and technological interfacing (see Acknowledgments). Inspired by discussions at this event, in this article, we further discuss the value of input from neuroscience for developing robots and machine interfaces, and the value of philosophy, the humanities, and the arts for identifying persistent links between human interfacing and broader ethical concerns. The importance of ongoing interdisciplinary debate and public communication on scientific and technical advances (...) is also highlighted. Throughout, the authors explore the implications of the extended mind hypothesis for notions of moral accountability and robotics. (shrink)

This paper raises a slightly uncomfortable question: are some delusional subjects responsible for their delusions? This question is uncomfortable because we typically think that the answer is pretty clearly just ‘no’. However, we also accept that self-deception is paradigmatically intentional behavior for which the self-deceiver is prima facie blameworthy. Thus, if there is overlap between self-deception and delusion, this will put pressure on our initial answer. This paper argues that there is indeed such overlap by offering a novel philosophical account (...) of self-deception. The account offered is independently plausible and avoids the main problems that plague other views. It also yields the result that some delusional subjects are self-deceived. The conclusion is not, however, that those subjects are blameworthy. Rather, a distinction is made between blameworthiness and ‘attributability’. States or actions can be significantly attributable to a subject—in the sense that they are expressions of their wills—without it being the case that the subject is blameworthy, if the subject has an appropriate excuse. Understanding delusions within this framework of responsibility and excuses not only illuminates the ways in which the processes of delusional belief formation and maintenance are continuous with ‘ordinary’ processes of belief formation and maintenance, it also provides a way of understanding the innocence of the delusional subject that does not involve the denial of agency. (shrink)

This paper provides new tools for philosophical argument analysis and fresh empirical foundations for ‘critical’ ordinary language philosophy. Language comprehension routinely involves stereotypical inferences with contextual defeaters. J.L. Austin’s Sense and Sensibilia first mooted the idea that contextually inappropriate stereotypical inferences from verbal case-descriptions drive some philosophical paradoxes; these engender philosophical problems that can be resolved by exposing the underlying fallacies. We build on psycholinguistic research on salience effects to explain when and why even perfectly competent speakers cannot help making (...) stereotypical inferences which are contextually inappropriate. We analyse a classical paradox about perception, suggest it relies on contextually inappropriate stereotypical inferences from appearance-verbs, and show that the conditions we identified as leading to contextually inappropriate stereotypical inferences are met in formulations of the paradox. Three experiments use a forced-choice plausibility-ranking task to document the predicted inappropriate inferences, in English, German, and Japanese. The cross-linguistic study allows us to assess the wider relevance of the proposed analysis. Our findings open up new perspectives for ‘evidential’ experimental philosophy. (shrink)

Ransomware has emerged as one of the most severe cybersecurity threats of the 21st century, impacting individuals, corporations, and critical infrastructure globally. Its evolution from simple, opportunistic malware into highly sophisticated, targeted campaigns reflects the growing capabilities of cybercriminals and the increasing value of digital assets. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the development of ransomware, tracing its roots from early examples like the AIDS Trojan of 1989 to the rise of crypto-ransomware such as WannaCry, Ryuk, and LockBit. The (...) study highlights how ransomware tactics have shifted, including the move from individual to enterprise targeting, the adoption of ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS), and the incorporation of double and triple extortion techniques. These innovations have made ransomware more damaging and harder to combat, posing serious challenges to traditional cybersecurity defences. In response to these threats, numerous defence strategies have been developed, ranging from proactive measures like endpoint detection and response (EDR), regular backups, and network segmentation, to reactive incident response plans and decryption tools. This paper categorizes and evaluates these strategies in terms of their effectiveness, cost, and scalability. The role of international law enforcement cooperation and cybersecurity frameworks (e.g., NIST, ISO/IEC 27001) is also explored. Finally, the paper discusses current research directions and technologies such as artificial intelligence, behavioural analysis, and blockchain that hold promise for future ransomware mitigation. The aim is to provide a balanced and in-depth perspective on both the evolution of ransomware and the multi-layered defence strategies required to counter it in today’s complex threat landscape. (shrink)