🔬 External Validation & Replication

independent, third-party validation of inference-phase dynamics
Estimated reading time: ~5 minute

Handoff Protocols

Overview

Recursive Science supports independent, third-party validation of inference-phase dynamics through two complementary validation artifacts designed for external research labs, evaluators, and technical reviewers.

These artifacts are built to test a specific claim:

Inference-phase behavior exhibits regimes and transitions that are measurable from output-only telemetry, and those signatures generalize across substrates.

This page is the official handoff interface for labs who want to replicate results, evaluate claims, or collaborate on standardized validation.

Purpose of This Page

This page documents the officially supported mechanisms by which external research labs, evaluators, and partners can independently test, replicate, and evaluate claims made within Recursive Science and its applied infrastructure derivatives.

The protocols listed here are designed to preserve independence, reproducibility, and measurement integrity while avoiding access to proprietary internals or training-time mechanisms.

✅ Validation Artifacts Available to External Labs

Recursive Science supports independent validation through two complementary artifacts:

1️⃣ Zero State Field (ZSF) - Substrate-Independent Microcosm

Purpose: Validate Recursive Science regime behavior outside transformers, in a controlled numerical substrate.

What it enables labs to test:

  • regime structure (stable → transitional → unstable → collapse)

  • attractor formation and stability behavior

  • drift / contraction dynamics under controlled conditions

  • reproducibility across seeds and runs

Repository:

  • 🔗 ZSF v1 Repo → [Insert repository link]

  • 📄 ZSF companion guide (public-facing) → (if you have a page link, add here)

2️⃣ Inference-Phase Stability Trial - Cross-Model Runtime Protocol

Purpose: Validate that output-only, model-agnostic telemetry can detect regime transitions and predictive lead-time in live inference, across multiple model families.

What it enables labs to test:

  • predictive lead-time windows (Δt) prior to failure

  • false positive rate vs. true regime transitions

  • cross-model variance and normalization tolerance bands

  • repeatability under standardized prompt classes (non-adversarial)

Repository:

  • 🔗 Stability Trial v1 Repo → [Insert repository link]

  • 📄 Stability Trial companion guide (public-facing) → (if you have a page link, add here)

🔒 Disclosure & Safety Boundary

Both artifacts are observational and evaluative:

  • ✅ output-only

  • ✅ model-agnostic where possible

  • ✅ reproducible under lab controls

  • ✅ designed to preserve independence

They do not:

  • modify model weights

  • intervene in generation

  • apply stabilization control

  • embed production corrective mechanisms

Production control systems derived from this research (e.g., FieldLock™) are not distributed externally.

🧭 Canonical References Inside the Lab Section

External validation is grounded in the field’s published measurement vocabulary. If you are replicating, reviewing, or mapping telemetry, these are the canonical reference points:

  • ⛭ Instrumentation Registry (Φ / Ψ / Ω) → (link to your Instrumentation page)

  • 🧷 Observables & Invariants (crosswalk + regime classification vocabulary) → (link to your Observables & Invariants page)

  • 🧠 Inference Phase Lab (field framing + program overview) → (link to your Lab overview page)

These pages define measurement correspondence (what is observed, when it matters, where it is measured),
not implementation or tuning recipes.

🧪 Recommended Replication Path (non-technical, procedural)

If you are a lab starting from zero, the recommended sequence is:

  1. Run ZSF first (verifies regime logic + pipeline sanity under deterministic controls)

  2. Run the Stability Trial next (tests portability into live inference systems)

  3. Report lead-time, false positives, cross-model variance, and regime alignment

  4. Share artifacts (telemetry + summary tables) under your institutional policies

🔬 For Research Labs: How to Engage or Replicate

If your lab intends to replicate or evaluate these protocols, you can engage in one of three modes:

  • Independent replication (no coordination required; use repos + lab pages)

  • Coordinated replication (shared evaluation format, aligned reporting, optional pre-registration)

  • Collaboration / pilot deployment (for teams evaluating operational extensions under NDA)

Contact:

  • 📩 [Insert preferred lab email / contact channel]

  • Include: institution, target models, intended evaluation mode, and expected timeframe (even if approximate)

🛑 Boundary Reminder

This page publishes what to validate and where to start - not proprietary operators, thresholds, tuning paths, or control mechanisms..