H018 Review

• Hypothesis ID: H018
• Name: Procedural Isomorphism
• Current statement: Different domains may instantiate the same procedural structure strongly enough to be recognized as structurally similar.
• Research question: Can cross-domain procedures preserve meaningful structural similarity despite vocabulary and context changes?
• Prior direction and strength: proposed / very low
• Prior kill-condition status: not_tested

Evidence Supporting

• EXP-003 reported mostly_stable backbone, literal, conceptual, and dimensional profiles across the tested domains. Source: research/evidence-runs/ECR-000003-representation-sensitivity/experiments/EXP-003-isomorphic-procedures/comparison/generated-v3.1/comparison-summary.md
• Explainability preserved a distinction between vocabulary shifts and backbone stability. Source: research/evidence-runs/ECR-000003-representation-sensitivity/experiments/EXP-003-isomorphic-procedures/comparison/generated-v3.2-explainability/isomorphic-procedure-explainability.md

Evidence Challenging

• EXP-003 still showed disagreement in primitive sequence, transitions, and constraints. Source: research/evidence-runs/ECR-000003-representation-sensitivity/experiments/EXP-003-isomorphic-procedures/comparison/generated-v3.1/comparison-summary.md
• Leakage findings and high-priority explainability items remain. Sources: research/evidence-runs/ECR-000003-representation-sensitivity/experiments/EXP-003-isomorphic-procedures/comparison/generated-v3.1/comparison-summary.md, research/evidence-runs/ECR-000003-representation-sensitivity/experiments/EXP-003-isomorphic-procedures/comparison/generated-v3.2-explainability/human-review-priority.md

Mixed Evidence

• The evidence is consistent with partial cross-domain structural similarity, but not with strong isomorphic equivalence.

Provider, Representation, and Domain Effects

• Domain changes did not erase backbone similarity, but they still changed recognition and detail layers.

Relevant Instrument Findings

• Comparator 3.1.0 captured stronger agreement at backbone and conceptual layers than at primitive or constraint layers.

Threats

• the selected domains may not be truly isomorphic
• model prior knowledge may supply extra alignment
• no human validation baseline exists

Alternative Explanations

• Similarity may reflect generic problem-solving templates rather than true domain-independent procedural isomorphism.

Kill Condition

• Current kill condition: isomorphic procedures with matched control flow produce unrelated structural extractions.
• Status: tested_not_met

Proposed Direction

slightly_supported

Proposed Evidence Strength

weak

Board Recommendation

retain

Rationale

This is the strongest candidate theoretical result from ECR-000003, but it remains provisional and highly dependent on follow-on falsification.

Next Evidence Needed

• negative non-isomorphic controls
• human expert review
• additional procedural families

Human Decision

• Decision:
• Reviewer:
• Date: