Omega Point · Lab
Hypotheses
Every hypothesis every run has written, newest run first. Each row says where it is: being named, waiting for the rest of its run, checked for duplicates, approved and being explained, published. A duplicate names the earlier hypothesis it restates. A published row links to its public page; nothing else is a link.
Run: pipeline-cbb2ac0831d7the run
| Hypothesis▲ | Question asked▲ | Date▼ | Engine▲ | Lens▲ | Status▲ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overridden revision rights may make accurate model corrections provoke deliberate errors IH_Q_L3_M_G3_2_01 · #0 Returning retellers may become less source-faithful as accurate model repairs override a lineage-specific revision right, despite intact private comprehension. Reject the distinct mechanism if calibrated reactance, ownership and learning models predict the authority-by-history contrast on new lineages. Explains the gap: Do human–AI retelling chains require a distinct recursive mechanism, or can resource-matched independent reconstruction and composed one-step channels predict their semantic trajectories in held-out contexts? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | authorship rights and normative commitment | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Conflicting revisions may erode connected story memories even after the text is repaired IH_Q_L3_M_G3_2_02 · #1 Repeated incompatible corrections may weaken neighboring causal links in a returning human’s memory despite restored text. Reject this distinct mechanism if ordinary interference explains the trajectory, damage does not spread through connected links, or the proposed hidden state merely renames scored errors. Explains the gap: Do human–AI retelling chains require a distinct recursive mechanism, or can resource-matched independent reconstruction and composed one-step channels predict their semantic trajectories in held-out contexts? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | Structure and topology | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Ordinary transformations may explain retelling chains without an extra recursive state IH_Q_L3_M_G3_2_03 · #2 Human–model retelling patterns may follow from composed ordinary transformations, even when semantic loss is real and order matters. Reject this account if a reproducible intervention discrepancy exceeds uncertainty and the meaningful margin after adequate state enrichment and model checks. Explains the gap: Do human–AI retelling chains require a distinct recursive mechanism, or can resource-matched independent reconstruction and composed one-step channels predict their semantic trajectories in held-out contexts? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | Measurement and interpretation | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Reinstating learned gestures may preserve causal roles during human–model retelling IH_Q_L3_M_G3_2_04 · #3 In human–model retelling, matching earlier role gestures may preserve who did what despite identical current text. Reject the new recursive family if ordinary multimodal memory predicts the full interaction, or reject the mechanism if verified action-memory changes produce no meaningful role-specific effect. Explains the gap: Do human–AI retelling chains require a distinct recursive mechanism, or can resource-matched independent reconstruction and composed one-step channels predict their semantic trajectories in held-out contexts? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | embodied action reinstatement | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Continuing evaluation with coarse checks may reward strategic omissions in retelling IH_Q_L3_M_G3_2_05 · #4 In human–model editing, future evaluation with coarse checks may favor omitting details that limit later reinterpretation. Reject the extra mechanism if ordinary editing predicts the continuation-by-audit effect, or informed participants show no contract-specific selectivity. Explains the gap: Do human–AI retelling chains require a distinct recursive mechanism, or can resource-matched independent reconstruction and composed one-step channels predict their semantic trajectories in held-out contexts? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | relational contract and ambiguity | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Relations among contributions may carry meaning through complete learner replacement IH_Q_L3_M_G1_1_01 · #5 A joint meaning may survive complete learner replacement through a spontaneously regenerated relation, despite negligible information in any isolated contribution. Reject the extra mechanism if established learning models predict swap and turnover effects, or a single carrier contains the meaning. Explains the gap: Which memetic hypothesis families survive matched intervention tests against their nearest established alternatives, and which first experiment best separates competing shortlists across copying, reconstruction, competition and persistence? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | candidate set selection | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Coupled content and source-validation routes may determine cultural-lineage survival IH_Q_L3_M_G1_1_02 · #6 A cultural descendant may reproduce only when reconstruction and source-validation routes support each other. Reject the extra family if established joint network models predict graph-realignment effects, or matching source attention and route dependencies removes them. Explains the gap: Which memetic hypothesis families survive matched intervention tests against their nearest established alternatives, and which first experiment best separates competing shortlists across copying, reconstruction, competition and persistence? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | candidate set selection | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Inherited withdrawal records may block stale copies while allowing independent support IH_Q_L3_M_G1_1_03 · #7 People may pass on which source occurrence was withdrawn, suppressing its stale copies while allowing independent support. Reject a distinct inheritance mechanism if matched source statements or established source-monitoring models predict the contrasts within the declared margin. Explains the gap: Which memetic hypothesis families survive matched intervention tests against their nearest established alternatives, and which first experiment best separates competing shortlists across copying, reconstruction, competition and persistence? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | candidate set selection | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Weak disturbances of inherited material memory may preserve multiple cultural practices IH_Q_L3_M_G1_1_04 · #8 In inherited workpieces, weak mechanical disturbances may preserve ancestral practices through reciprocal changes in material state and novice actions. Reject the new-family claim if calibrated material memory plus ordinary reconstruction predicts the full disturbance region, reset effect and transfer to new learners. Explains the gap: Which memetic hypothesis families survive matched intervention tests against their nearest established alternatives, and which first experiment best separates competing shortlists across copying, reconstruction, competition and persistence? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | candidate set selection | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Reciprocal repair may preserve cultural rules by remapping relations among fragments IH_Q_L3_M_G3_1_01 · #9 Groups may restore an inherited action rule after replacing a carrier by remapping relations among fragments that are uninformative alone. Reject the distinct mechanism if fixed joint decoding and measured individual learning predict the recovery, or the recovery contrast is equivalent to zero. Explains the gap: Which approximately five hypothesis families deserve priority, and which affordable first experiment best separates their causal rivals, when matched pilots compare semantic transformation, adoption and persistence across human, generative and recommendation regimes? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | relational semantic reencoding | Archived Duplicate of Relations among contributions may carry meaning through complete learner replacement |
| Knowing which peers processed a correction may gate its public retelling IH_Q_L3_M_G3_1_02 · #10 People may understand a correction yet withhold it from public retelling until enough peers seem to have processed it. Reject this extra mechanism if ordinary recency, reliability and shared-knowledge models predict the test cases within declared bounds, or verified version labels add no effect. Explains the gap: Which approximately five hypothesis families deserve priority, and which affordable first experiment best separates their causal rivals, when matched pilots compare semantic transformation, adoption and persistence across human, generative and recommendation regimes? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | Information and sensing | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Interruptions may erase source-bound checks and change which meanings people transmit IH_Q_L3_M_G3_1_03 · #11 In narrative retelling, losing source-bound checking progress may raise the wrong/right commitment ratio despite matched evidence and time. Reject the extra mechanism if established accumulation or editing models predict both fragmentation and checkpoint rescue on held-out examples. Explains the gap: Which approximately five hypothesis families deserve priority, and which affordable first experiment best separates their causal rivals, when matched pilots compare semantic transformation, adoption and persistence across human, generative and recommendation regimes? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | sequential rejection dynamics | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Linked conventions may store reversal history in how they replace one another IH_Q_L3_M_G3_1_04 · #12 After feed withdrawal, links between conventions may preserve past reversals in later replacement choices. Reject the extra mechanism if calibrated independent switching or learning models predict the full loop, overshoot and link-reassignment response. Explains the gap: Which approximately five hypothesis families deserve priority, and which affordable first experiment best separates their causal rivals, when matched pilots compare semantic transformation, adoption and persistence across human, generative and recommendation regimes? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | interacting reversal memory | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| One fixed response to meaning loss may govern cultural reconstruction and choice IH_Q_L3_M_G1_2_01 · #13 In online narrative or instruction tasks, a response law calibrated on reconstruction may predict choice and retelling from fixed meaning errors and production costs. Reject the one-family claim if matched tests retain an independent causal response; a flexible model fitted after failure cannot rescue it. Explains the gap: How many causally distinct hypothesis families remain necessary to predict held-out cultural transmission experiments once equivalent mechanisms are merged and each retained dependency is experimentally removed? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | candidate set selection | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| A third cultural variant may change how competing variants are reconstructed IH_Q_L3_M_G1_2_02 · #14 Cultural transmission may require reconstruction, selection and a distinct contextual modifier. Reject the modifier as a separate family if calibrated component models predict its held-out effect or if the effect survives only under one meaning measure. Explains the gap: How many causally distinct hypothesis families remain necessary to predict held-out cultural transmission experiments once equivalent mechanisms are merged and each retained dependency is experimentally removed? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | candidate set selection | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Condition-dependent scoring may create false extra families of cultural transmission IH_Q_L3_M_G1_2_03 · #15 Scoring differences may falsely split cultural transmission into more than reconstruction and selection. Reject this account if an extra effect persists in behavior, survives independent human scoring, and disappears when its own causal dependency is removed. Explains the gap: How many causally distinct hypothesis families remain necessary to predict held-out cultural transmission experiments once equivalent mechanisms are merged and each retained dependency is experimentally removed? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | candidate set selection | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Overlapping updates may transmit conflicting cultural rules despite accurate individual recall IH_Q_L3_M_G1_2_04 · #16 In an online reference game, incompatible updates may create inherited rule conflicts beyond partner learning, motivating four distinct dependencies. Reject the extra update mechanism if established learning, visible history and recency predict all effects; serializing updates should remove any excess conflict. Explains the gap: How many causally distinct hypothesis families remain necessary to predict held-out cultural transmission experiments once equivalent mechanisms are merged and each retained dependency is experimentally removed? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | candidate set selection | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Cultural transmission may require six distinct pathways that cannot be merged IH_Q_L3_M_G1_2_05 · #17 In text or rule learning, six pathways may each be necessary because they respond differently to targeted removal and rescue. The exact count is rejected if a merged model predicts those responses, including combinations and timing changes. Explains the gap: How many causally distinct hypothesis families remain necessary to predict held-out cultural transmission experiments once equivalent mechanisms are merged and each retained dependency is experimentally removed? Void gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | candidate set selection | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Successful model prediction may prompt humans to evade its next story reconstruction IH_Q_L3_M_G1_3_01 · #18 Returning retellers may choose edits that evade a familiar model’s next reconstruction, even with equally original immediate meanings. Reject the extra mechanism if calibrated reactance and novelty-seeking predict the partner-specific crossover, or a precise test finds no crossover. Explains the gap: Can independently measured human and model transformation kernels predict alternating-chain semantics, or does retained interaction history change descendants after current source material, resources and immediate framing are matched? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | anticipatory semantic evasion | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Mutual timing resets may steer meaning in human–model retelling chains IH_Q_L3_M_G1_3_02 · #19 Interaction history may set when humans and models commit to a meaning, so identical source texts develop differently. Reject this timing mechanism if separately measured boundary and memory effects explain the response, or if a repeatable phase or mutual timing reset is absent. Explains the gap: Can independently measured human and model transformation kernels predict alternating-chain semantics, or does retained interaction history change descendants after current source material, resources and immediate framing are matched? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | temporal competence gating | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Lost quotation scope may turn story fragments into self-reinforcing model instructions IH_Q_L3_M_G1_3_03 · #20 In human–model editing chains, lost quotation scope may turn story text into instructions whose execution encourages further scope loss. The distinct feedback claim fails if independently measured human conversion and model instruction-following processes predict the held-out effect. Explains the gap: Can independently measured human and model transformation kernels predict alternating-chain semantics, or does retained interaction history change descendants after current source material, resources and immediate framing are matched? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | instruction data boundary conversion | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Mistaken choice summaries may reinforce human preferences through repeated justification IH_Q_L3_M_G1_3_04 · #21 In human–model retelling, justifying a misreported choice may rebuild a preference that the model then reinforces. Accurate choice receipts should weaken the effect; prediction by separately measured choice and model processes would reject an additional feedback mechanism. Explains the gap: Can independently measured human and model transformation kernels predict alternating-chain semantics, or does retained interaction history change descendants after current source material, resources and immediate framing are matched? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | Measurement and interpretation | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Public approval may reduce private cultural adoption by restoring competing options IH_Q_L3_M_G2_1_01 · #22 In a browser task, approval tied to public expression may restore competing remembered actions and reduce private use despite matched exposure. Reject the distinct mechanism if ordinary learning and retrieval explain private choice, or restored access to competitors leaves adoption unchanged after verified changes. Explains the gap: Which feedback connection must be interrupted to change private cultural adoption rather than only public reproduction, and can matched exposure histories distinguish recipient reinforcement from recommender memory? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | competitor retrieval release | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Contact sorting may sustain private cultural adoption by lowering compatibility costs IH_Q_L3_M_G2_1_02 · #23 Compatible partner patches may preserve private use after feedback ends despite matched feeds and contact budgets. Reject a distinct mechanism if ordinary homophily and coordination models predict all held-out trajectories, or successful contact remixing yields a precise absence of geometry-dependent private use. Explains the gap: Which feedback connection must be interrupted to change private cultural adoption rather than only public reproduction, and can matched exposure histories distinguish recipient reinforcement from recommender memory? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | Structure and topology | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Jointly useful production aids may sustain private cultural adoption after rewards end IH_Q_L3_M_G2_1_03 · #24 Reward-built aids may jointly reduce the cost of a cultural practice and sustain private use after rewards end. Reject the distinct family if calibrated additive-cost models predict the whole trajectory; reject capital as dominant if removing verified savings leaves adoption unchanged. Explains the gap: Which feedback connection must be interrupted to change private cultural adoption rather than only public reproduction, and can matched exposure histories distinguish recipient reinforcement from recommender memory? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | practice specific complementary capital | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Diversifying practical risks may sustain private cultural adoption after public sharing fades IH_Q_L3_M_G2_1_04 · #25 People may keep a convention because its outcomes hedge failures of other routines, even after recommendation memory resets. Reject a distinct mechanism if ordinary risk-sensitive choice predicts the full trajectory, or verified changes in covariance and insurance produce precisely no joint response. Explains the gap: Which feedback connection must be interrupted to change private cultural adoption rather than only public reproduction, and can matched exposure histories distinguish recipient reinforcement from recommender memory? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | actuarial payoff diversification | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Successful checking may turn a cultural exception into an inferred ordinary rule IH_Q_L3_M_G2_3_01 · #26 Repeatedly checking true cues in fictional routines may reverse the stated rule and exception when checks seem deliberate. The claim fails if ordinary pragmatic inference predicts the verification contrast or no residual effect remains within the equivalence margin Explains the gap: Does independently checkable redundancy protect cultural meaning through human–AI transmission, or can shared semantic reconstruction defeat correction while surface fidelity and immediate task performance improve? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | verification induced pragmatic scope | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Random changes in checking format may speed commitment to a wrong interpretation IH_Q_L3_M_G2_3_02 · #27 Random format changes may most rapidly produce a committed source error at an intermediate switching rate. Reject the added mechanism if separated barriers yield monotonic curves or established models predict held-out error timing and its timescale shift within the stated margin. Explains the gap: Does independently checkable redundancy protect cultural meaning through human–AI transmission, or can shared semantic reconstruction defeat correction while surface fidelity and immediate task performance improve? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | Interfaces and barriers | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Checking may carry mistaken identity pairings into later cultural retellings IH_Q_L3_M_G2_3_03 · #28 In narratives and recipe analogues, checking may preserve a wrong entity pairing and transmit exact role swaps despite full source access. Stable identity tags should selectively help; reject a distinct mechanism if calibrated ordinary binding errors explain the pattern or correspondence continuity adds no effect. Explains the gap: Does independently checkable redundancy protect cultural meaning through human–AI transmission, or can shared semantic reconstruction defeat correction while surface fidelity and immediate task performance improve? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | referential correspondence capture | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Inherited test exclusions may hide causal errors despite improving check results IH_Q_L3_M_G2_3_04 · #29 Successors may inherit rules that avoid decisive recipe tests, losing source-specific causal knowledge despite better scores on familiar checks. Reject the distinct claim if established learning models predict the contrasts or policy swapping/resetting has no independent effect. Explains the gap: Does independently checkable redundancy protect cultural meaning through human–AI transmission, or can shared semantic reconstruction defeat correction while surface fidelity and immediate task performance improve? Adversarial gap | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | inherited causal test policy | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Accurate correction may close the speaking agenda and cause cultural omissions IH_Q_L3_M_G2_2_01 · #30 After accurate correction, speakers may know a relation yet omit it for an uninformed recipient; opening an answer-free agenda beforehand may prevent this. Reject a distinct mechanism if ordinary audience-design and retrieval models predict the whole interaction. Explains the gap: Which ordering of source-grounded correction and human reconstruction preserves cultural meaning beyond fixed-channel predictions, what must be retained before correction works, and does the benefit survive correction withdrawal? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | communicative agenda closure | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Reconstruction may improve correction by revealing which repairs are useful together IH_Q_L3_M_G2_2_02 · #31 In human cultural transmission, reconstruction may reveal jointly useful repairs, so allocating correction time to packages could remove an order advantage. Reject this explanation if bids fail to predict allocation or matched allocation leaves a repeatable agenda-, sleep- or selection-rule effect. Explains the gap: Which ordering of source-grounded correction and human reconstruction preserves cultural meaning beyond fixed-channel predictions, what must be retained before correction works, and does the benefit survive correction withdrawal? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | complementary correction allocation | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Sleep may favor correction after reconstruction by stabilizing source-role bindings IH_Q_L3_M_G2_2_03 · #32 Reconstruction followed by correction may preserve source relations if sleep stabilizes the corrected episode; cueing a conflicting episode may reverse the advantage. Reject a distinct mechanism if only a general sleep benefit appears or standard replay models predict the full contrast. Explains the gap: Which ordering of source-grounded correction and human reconstruction preserves cultural meaning beyond fixed-channel predictions, what must be retained before correction works, and does the benefit survive correction withdrawal? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | sleep stage dependent episodic stabilization | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Correction order may bias later rule meanings through beliefs about why examples were chosen IH_Q_L3_M_G2_2_04 · #33 In invented narrative worlds, correction order may carry inferred example-selection policies into new rule judgments despite equal fact recall. Reject an extra-history mechanism if ordinary sampling-based inference fully predicts the errors; a verified policy reset should make the excess effect negligible. Explains the gap: Which ordering of source-grounded correction and human reconstruction preserves cultural meaning beyond fixed-channel predictions, what must be retained before correction works, and does the benefit survive correction withdrawal? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | ascertainment conditioned evidential generalization | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Cultural copying may be suppressed by its expected influence on future recommendations IH_Q_L3_M_G4_2_01 · #34 For harmless conventions, disconnecting copying from real recommendation training may increase new human descendants despite lost amplification. The claim fails if suppression does not follow the transferred training link or ordinary reactance predicts the held-out results Explains the gap: Do pulse-identified feedback models predict lineage extinction when human relay and recommender memory are separately interrupted, or can identical measured feedback conceal different survival mechanisms? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | counterfactual policy influence | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Inherited takeover rules may recruit human relays when recommendations fail IH_Q_L3_M_G4_2_02 · #35 After recommendation failure, a human standby relay may take over and pass its handover rule onward. Reject the distinct mechanism if it fails to predict either break or ordinary retention plus an additive warning response explains the effect. Explains the gap: Do pulse-identified feedback models predict lineage extinction when human relay and recommender memory are separately interrupted, or can identical measured feedback conceal different survival mechanisms? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | Information and sensing | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Inherited return cues may rearm completed intentions and sustain cultural copying IH_Q_L3_M_G4_2_03 · #36 Inherited cultural outputs may recreate cues that trigger fresh acts after a relay obligation ends. Reject the loop if no new commission effect appears, cue suppression leaves the excess unchanged, or an open-loop cue-response model explains the tail and descendants without inherited rearming. Explains the gap: Do pulse-identified feedback models predict lineage extinction when human relay and recommender memory are separately interrupted, or can identical measured feedback conceal different survival mechanisms? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | prospective action deactivation | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Inherited defaults may sustain traditions when people reinstall them for successors IH_Q_L3_M_G4_2_04 · #37 In shared naming or document tasks, inheriting a default may encourage people to set it again for successors, even with their own output fixed. Reject a distinct mechanism if default bias and carried-over settings explain all outcomes, or its benefit vanishes with effort and authority cues matched. Explains the gap: Do pulse-identified feedback models predict lineage extinction when human relay and recommender memory are separately interrupted, or can identical measured feedback conceal different survival mechanisms? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | procedural default inheritance | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Confirmed understanding by an unreachable recipient may weaken the sender's memory IH_Q_L3_M_G5_3_01 · #38 In online narrative chains, confirmed understanding by an unreachable recipient may reduce the sender's memory while later tellings survive. Reject a distinct mechanism if receipt and archive conditions behave alike or ordinary offloading and goal completion predict the joint pattern. Explains the gap: Does cultural persistence remember exposure history in people, or only in the allocator, when recommendation state is reset and subsequent reproduction opportunities are held constant? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | recipient contingent mnemonic disposal | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Exposure order may fragment private free time and block long cultural practices IH_Q_L3_M_G5_3_02 · #39 People may retain exposure order as private time reservations, rejecting long cultural acts despite equal real opportunity after recommendation reset. Reject this distinct mechanism if calibrated ordinary time and choice models reproduce all predicted contrasts, or if private reservations are absent. Explains the gap: Does cultural persistence remember exposure history in people, or only in the allocator, when recommendation state is reset and subsequent reproduction opportunities are held constant? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | Resource and energy | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Exposure history may bias sleep cueing to preserve cultural source lineages IH_Q_L3_M_G5_3_03 · #40 After recommendation reset, exposure history may determine how source-linked sleep cues preserve details and cultural descendants; reject the distinct mechanism if ordinary memory and cueing models explain later transmission, or awakenings or unequal waking rehearsal explain the cue effects. Explains the gap: Does cultural persistence remember exposure history in people, or only in the allocator, when recommendation state is reset and subsequent reproduction opportunities are held constant? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | sleep dependent source priority | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |
| Reassigning past effort to another cultural lineage may transfer its persistence advantage IH_Q_L3_M_G5_3_04 · #41 In equally learned narrative-sharing practices after recommendation reset, crediting the same completed work to another lineage may move voluntary persistence without changing skill or memory fidelity; the distinct claim fails if ordinary accounting and effort justification predict the transfer Explains the gap: Does cultural persistence remember exposure history in people, or only in the allocator, when recommendation state is reset and subsequent reproduction opportunities are held constant? | Find genuinely new, falsifiable hypotheses in empirical memetics and recommend the most promising theories and experiments. Interpret memetics as the transmission, transformation, competition and persistence of cultural information, including internet memes, narratives and cultural practices. Produce a research agenda, not a campaign to manipulate people. Identify the unresolved mechanisms using cultural evolution, cognitive science, network science, information theory and computational social science, including changes introduced by recommendation algorithms and generative AI. Distinguish established theories from new conjectures and check whether each proposed mechanism is already known under another name. Prioritize approximately five hypothesis families by substantive scientific novelty, explanatory power, discriminating testability, feasibility and expected information gain; rank the best first experiment. For each shortlisted theory give an operational definition of the transmitted unit, a causal mechanism or formal model, plausible competing explanations, contrasting quantitative predictions, a decisive experiment with manipulations and controls, measurable primary outcomes, power-analysis inputs rather than invented sample-size precision, major confounds and a result that would falsify the theory. Separate reach, copying fidelity, semantic change, adoption and persistence. Include both an affordable initial experiment and the stronger validation needed for a general claim. Assess what existing primary evidence actually establishes; do not call plausible extensions proven discoveries. User request in Russian: «хочу найти новые гипотезы в сфере меметиков; предложи самые перспективные эксперименты и теории». Return published question and hypothesis pages, complete Russian versions and English originals, with poster sheets. | 2026-10-02 21:40 | 1.4 | irrecoverable investment accounting | Published live 2026-10-05 Published · poster live |