PLCT — Phase Progression and Admissibility/Stability Results
Overview
PLCT — Phase Progression and Admissibility/Stability Results is a CJCI end-of-cycle technical report documenting the Projection-Limited Cognition Testbed, a phase-gated research program investigating representation limits, measurement construction, calibration behavior, admissibility, and dynamic self-referential measurement stability.
Across Phases 1–6 and amendment tracks A-P6-1 and A-P6-2, PLCT separates representation capacity, measurement construction, calibration behavior, admissibility, and temporal stability under constrained experimental conditions.
The central result is that, within the tested configurations, stability was observed only when both admissibility and temporal alignment under iteration were satisfied.
A full PDF version of the report is available through the PDF button in the upper-right corner of this page. The PDF opens locally in the browser first, allowing page browsing and download if desired.
Official Links
CJCI Issue Page:
https://www.carlonoscopen.com/journal/v1i9
Author ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-2284-8891
Report Details
- Title: PLCT — Phase Progression and Admissibility/Stability Results
- Author: Ivan Silva
- Publisher: Carlonoscopen, LLC
- Language: English
- Publication Date: April 27, 2026
- Format: Web publication and PDF report
- Journal Context: Carlonoscopen Journal of Coherence Intelligence, Volume 1, Issue 9
- ISSN: 3069-874X
- Version: 1.0.1
Abstract
The Projection-Limited Cognition Testbed (PLCT) is a confidential research program investigating representation-theoretic limits on measurement and dynamic stability in self-referential measurement systems. The program executed six contract-first, phase-gated experimental phases and two amendment tracks under a single fixed seed and a strict no-post-hoc-tuning discipline.
Phase 6 established that dynamic self-referential measurement stability is achievable: 2 of 6 Φ × CPM configurations passed Gate 6, both under the PRP coherence-preserving method. Amendment track A-P6-1 then tested whether a framework-specific tetrahedral / fractional-memory lift of Phase 6 preserves stability under a stricter geometric-non-degeneracy gate; it did not. Amendment track A-P6-2 subsequently certified that 4 of 6 pairs satisfy point-wise admissibility under explicit closure, non-degeneracy, Lipschitz, projection, and measurement-compatibility criteria.
The cross-phase synthesis is that stability requires both admissibility and temporal alignment under iteration: admissibility certified at A-P6-2 is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the trajectory stability tested at A-P6-1.
Phase Summary
- Phase 1: representation vs capacity separation.
- Phase 2: classifier limitation.
- Phase 2.x: measurement geometry limitation.
- Phase 3: measurement method-set limitation.
- Phase 4: measurement construction validation, post-A-P4-1.
- Phase 5: calibration replacement failure, post-cascade.
- Phase 6: dynamic self-referential measurement stability validated for 2 of 6 pairs.
- A-P6-1: tetrahedral / fractional lift failed to preserve stability.
- A-P6-2: admissibility certification passed for 4 of 6 pairs.
Core Findings
- Dynamic self-referential measurement stability is achievable under specific scalar-state configurations.
- A tetrahedral / fractional-memory lift does not automatically preserve that stability.
- Local admissibility can hold even when iterated trajectory stability fails.
- Admissibility is necessary but not sufficient for temporal stability under iteration.
Integrity Records
| Track | Status | Summary SHA-256 |
|---|---|---|
| Phase 4 | Closed post-A-P4-1 | 2508077950639c85a406383eecf4c78ed079d4553123f51a595679580d78e5fc |
| Phase 5 | Closed post-cascade | 099dabc7815d893fc76babb7bf10b6592a9a95464cd7a2a239a99c52feaf5e83 |
| Phase 6 | Gate PASSED | 0864771677bc998ab1cf5a5bce729ca96149833051d77cf69eb11a922268c61d |
| A-P6-1 | Gate FAILED | 9214b0ce07d8ca5d473529302cd7e5c65026d26af0fd7a42ff68904e1519608d |
| A-P6-2 | Gate PASSED | 98a1dcf7b77d8fa0909b70fbddbdce4e1a70c474123a5c97d90196a79d73c181 |
Explicit Non-Claims
- This work does not claim consciousness.
- This work does not solve the Phase 5 calibration anomaly.
- This work does not define a deployable intelligence system.
- This work does not generalize beyond the tested configurations.
- This work does not validate or refute any broader external theory of consciousness.
The phrase “identity under self-referential measurement” is treated strictly as a testing hypothesis, not as a design prescription.
Usage Boundaries and Safety Posture
This work is released as a measurement, evaluation, and certification framework. It is not intended as a blueprint for autonomous agents, a real-world control architecture, a self-improving intelligence system, or a deployable autonomous system.
Applications involving autonomous decision-making, physical actuation, large-scale control, or operational deployment must implement independent governance, constraint enforcement, and safety validation layers.
The author explicitly discourages use in defense systems, military systems, weaponized applications, or unconstrained adaptive systems.
Publication Note
This page is published as part of the Carlonoscopen Journal of Coherence Intelligence , Volume 1, Issue 9. The PDF linked from this page is the full public technical report for offline reading, citation support, and archival use.
A secondary Zenodo record may be created later as a republished archival version based on this CJCI publication.