coulomb-research/seed/CoulombResearchMilestonePlan.md

Coulomb Research Milestone Plan

Purpose

This milestone plan is the backbone for establishing Coulomb Research as a practical co-creation science facility.

The governing implementation principle is:

Build only the minimum research infrastructure demanded by real research artifacts.

The first two papers are used to bootstrap and test the system:

• CR-000 — Paper Zero about Coulomb Research itself.
• CR-001 — Paper One originating from the soul-frame research program.

Both start as internal-circulation-only papers, then aim to advance to external preprint and finally to a conference/journal target.

Coulomb Research should not begin by building a large platform. It should begin by conducting research and letting actual research work determine which infrastructure is necessary.

---

Milestone Overview

M0   Establish the research facility skeleton
M1   Draft CR-000: Coulomb Research
M2   Introduce claim/evidence discipline
M3   Register CR-001: soul-frame
M4   Establish the common internal paper lifecycle
M5   Establish the internal paper registry
M6   Introduce Scout and Critic research agents
M7   Perform the first internal circulation
M8   Prepare CR-000 for external preprint
M9   Advance CR-001 one cycle behind CR-000
M10  Introduce venue discovery and publication targeting
M11  Introduce public research signals
M12  Experiment with research charts and certifications

---

M0 — Establish the Research Facility Skeleton

Goal

Create the smallest repository structure required to register, evolve, criticize, and version real research work.

Initial structure

coulomb-research/
├── INTENT.md
├── CoulombResearchKernel.md
├── PublicationInterface.md
├── ResearchSignals.md
├── ResearchCharts.md
├── research/
│   ├── programs/
│   │   └── RP-000-researching-research/
│   │       ├── INTENT.md
│   │       ├── questions.md
│   │       └── papers/
│   │           └── paper-000/
│   │               ├── README.md
│   │               ├── manuscript.md
│   │               ├── claims.md
│   │               ├── evidence.md
│   │               ├── criticism.md
│   │               └── publication.yaml
│   └── registry/
│       └── papers.yaml
└── docs/
    └── ResearchArtifactConvention.md

Exit Criterion

Coulomb Research can register and evolve one internal research paper with versioned artifacts and explicit publication state.

Explicit Non-Goals

Do not yet build:

• forum software,
• a DAO,
• tokens,
• NFTs,
• a preprint server,
• an academic social network,
• a journal workflow,
• a generalized funding platform.

---

M1 — CR-000: Coulomb Research Paper Zero

Working Title

Coulomb Research: A Minimal Self-Improving Architecture for Human–AI Co-Creation Science

Publication State

paper_id: CR-000
research_program: RP-000
publication_stage: P1
publication_state: internal-circulation

Research Question

Can scientific knowledge production be reduced to a small cybernetic kernel of actors, propositions, evidence, actions, resources, criticism, and recursive self-improvement, while treating conventional scientific institutions primarily as interoperability surfaces?

Purpose

CR-000 is not merely a description of Coulomb Research.

It is Coulomb Research's first experiment.

The paper should present:

• a conjectured research architecture,
• explicit assumptions,
• known limitations,
• a concrete experimental program,
• competing interpretations,
• falsifiable or at least criticizable expectations.

Initial Structure

Abstract

1. Motivation
2. Problem
   2.1 Institutional inheritance in digital science
   2.2 AI changes the cost structure of research
3. Design objective
   3.1 Co-creation science
   3.2 Institutional minimality
4. The Coulomb Research kernel
   4.1 Actors
   4.2 Propositions
   4.3 Evidence
   4.4 Actions
   4.5 Resources
5. Cybernetic research loop
6. Recursive self-improvement
7. Human–AI research participation
8. Interoperability with conventional science
9. Decentralization and programmable resources
10. Research signals and relevance
11. Failure modes
12. Initial experiments
13. Open research questions
14. Conclusion

Exit Criterion

A coherent CR-000 v0.1 exists as an internal-circulation manuscript.

---

M2 — Introduce Minimal Claim/Evidence Discipline

Goal

Test the Coulomb-native research representation manually before implementing software around it.

Required Artifacts

For CR-000 maintain at least:

manuscript.md
claims.md
evidence.md
criticism.md

Example Claims

CR-000-C001
AI reduces the need for several historically human-mediated
scientific coordination functions.

CR-000-C002
Papers need not remain the canonical internal representation
of scientific knowledge.

CR-000-C003
A graph of propositions, evidence, actions, and provenance can
support richer scientific coordination than document-centric
publication alone.

CR-000-C004
Criticism can operate continuously rather than as a discrete
peer-review gate.

CR-000-C005
Research institutions can recursively experiment on their own
coordination mechanisms.

Purpose

This milestone asks:

Is the proposed Coulomb-native representation useful for conducting actual research?

If not, change the kernel before building software around it.

Exit Criterion

Major manuscript claims are explicitly addressable and linked to supporting or challenging evidence.

---

M3 — Register CR-001: Soul-Frame Paper One

Goal

Introduce a research trajectory that is independent of Coulomb Research itself.

CR-000 is inherently self-referential. CR-001 tests whether the research mechanisms transfer to another domain.

Candidate Working Title

Toward Operational Criteria for Artificial Beings: Autonomy, Individuation, System Closure, and Reciprocal Recognition

Initial Registration

paper_id: CR-001
origin_project: soul-frame
publication_stage: P1
publication_state: internal-circulation

Intended Research Domain

Candidate concerns include:

• systems theory,
• autonomy,
• individuation,
• artificial agents,
• operational notions of personhood,
• system closure,
• reciprocal recognition,
• human–AI interaction.

Exit Criterion

CR-001 is registered and has an initial manuscript or structured paper skeleton.

---

M4 — Establish the Common Internal Paper Lifecycle

Goal

Create one minimal lifecycle that both CR-000 and CR-001 follow.

Initial Lifecycle

DRAFT
  ↓
CLAIMS EXTRACTED
  ↓
EVIDENCE MAPPED
  ↓
INTERNAL CRITICISM
  ↓
REVISION
  ↓
INTERNAL CIRCULATION RELEASE

This entire lifecycle remains within publication stage P1.

Required Paper Artifacts

manuscript.md
claims.md
evidence.md
criticism.md
revision-log.md
publication.yaml

Exit Criterion

Both CR-000 and CR-001 can progress through the same explicit internal workflow.

---

M5 — Establish the Internal Paper Registry

Goal

Introduce the first facility-level registry of research papers.

Initial Format

A simple Git-versioned YAML file is sufficient.

Example:

papers:

  - id: CR-000
    title: >
      Coulomb Research: A Minimal Self-Improving Architecture
      for Human–AI Co-Creation Science
    program: RP-000
    stage: P1
    version: 0.1
    status: internal-circulation

  - id: CR-001
    title: >
      Toward Operational Criteria for Artificial Beings
    source: soul-frame
    stage: P1
    version: 0.1
    status: internal-circulation

Design Principle

Do not introduce a database until the research process demonstrates a need for one.

Git already provides useful bootstrap capabilities:

• revision history,
• timestamps,
• branching,
• attribution,
• content integrity,
• collaborative review.

Exit Criterion

All active Coulomb papers are discoverable through one authoritative registry.

---

M6 — Introduce Scout and Critic Research Agents

Goal

Introduce the first actual machine participants in Coulomb Research.

Scout

Responsibilities:

• literature discovery,
• prior-art search,
• reference expansion,
• related-work identification,
• missing-source detection.

Candidate outputs:

literature-scan.md
prior-art.md
related-work.md
missing-references.md

Critic

Responsibilities:

• identify unsupported claims,
• search for counterexamples,
• identify conceptual weaknesses,
• detect methodological gaps,
• identify missing competing explanations.

Candidate criticism object:

criticism_id: CR-000-X001
target_claim: CR-000-C003
type: counterargument
severity: material
status: unresolved

Human Role

Human participants may:

• accept criticism,
• reject criticism with rationale,
• partially accept it,
• revise the target claim,
• supersede a claim,
• request further investigation.

Exit Criterion

At least one Scout cycle and one Critic cycle have materially changed each active paper.

---

M7 — First Internal Circulation

Goal

Expose both papers to a small number of external readers while keeping them within P1.

Initial Audience

A deliberately small group is preferable:

3–10 readers

The goal is quality of criticism, not reach.

Requested Review Questions

1. Which proposition is unclear?
2. Which proposition appears unsupported?
3. Which proposition is probably false?
4. What important prior work is missing?
5. What competing explanation should be considered?
6. What evidence would change your view?
7. What experiment or observation would most improve the paper?
8. What should be removed because it adds complexity without explanatory value?

Exit Criterion

Both papers have received attributable external criticism and have completed at least one revision cycle in response.

---

M8 — Prepare CR-000 for External Preprint

Goal

Move Paper Zero toward publication stage P2.

Candidate Gate Criteria

CR-000 should not advance merely because time has passed.

Candidate readiness criteria:

• major propositions are explicit,
• important evidence sources are identified,
• major counterarguments are represented,
• limitations are stated,
• related work is sufficiently mapped,
• the contribution is distinguished from ResearchHub, DeSci, open-science infrastructure, and conventional digital publishing,
• at least one internal criticism/revision cycle is complete,
• provenance of material AI contributions is recorded,
• publication artifacts can be generated reproducibly.

State Transition

publication_stage: P2-candidate
publication_state: preprint-preparation

Outputs

Prepare:

• preprint-ready manuscript,
• public abstract,
• public metadata,
• contribution statement,
• provenance statement,
• supplementary research artifacts,
• appropriate references,
• reproducibility material where relevant.

Exit Criterion

CR-000 is ready to be deposited in an appropriate external preprint environment.

---

M9 — Advance CR-001 One Cycle Behind CR-000

Goal

Create a repeating research pipeline rather than a one-off Paper Zero exercise.

The intended trajectory is:

CR-000
P1 → P2 → P3

CR-001
P1 → P2 → P3

with CR-001 following approximately one cycle behind CR-000.

Purpose

This tests whether:

• the workflow transfers across topics,
• lessons from Paper Zero improve Paper One,
• the publication interface is reusable,
• agent roles generalize,
• repository conventions remain practical.

Exit Criterion

CR-001 reaches preprint-candidate maturity using substantially the same mechanisms as CR-000.

---

M10 — Introduce Venue Discovery and Publication Targeting

Goal

Treat journals and conferences as outbound interoperability targets rather than internal organizing structures.

Venue Scout

A venue-discovery capability should evaluate:

• subject fit,
• audience fit,
• methodological expectations,
• manuscript format,
• review model,
• publication fees,
• open-access conditions,
• submission cadence,
• data/software requirements,
• AI-authorship or AI-use rules,
• likely conceptual objections.

Potential Fields for CR-000

Candidate venue domains may include:

• metascience,
• science of science,
• open science,
• cybernetics,
• systems science,
• human–AI collaboration,
• computational social science.

Potential Fields for CR-001

Candidate venue domains may include:

• artificial life,
• cognitive systems,
• philosophy of AI,
• systems theory,
• agent research.

State Transition

publication_stage: P3
publication_state: venue-candidate
target:
  venue:
  track:
  requirements:

Exit Criterion

At least one paper has a well-justified external venue target and can be rendered into the required submission form.

---

M11 — Introduce Public Research Signals

Goal

Observe real research activity before designing ranking systems.

Do not build research charts while the network is empty.

Candidate Initial Events

Once public artifacts exist, observe:

• reads,
• downloads,
• citations,
• external mentions,
• criticisms,
• replications,
• reuse,
• follow-up propositions,
• dependent research,
• derived software or datasets.

Principle

Keep separate:

ATTENTION
INFLUENCE
EPISTEMIC SUPPORT
UTILITY
GENERATIVITY

Exit Criterion

Coulomb can collect and inspect a useful set of real downstream signals for public research artifacts.

---

M12 — Experiment with Research Charts and Certifications

Goal

Use real signal data to test relevance-marketing mechanisms.

Initial Chart Experiments

Candidate charts:

• Coulomb Research Monthly,
• Most Reused,
• Most Replicated,
• Most Challenged,
• Most Generative,
• Fastest Rising,
• Most Valuable Criticism,
• Most Productive Open Problem.

Initial Certification Principle

Avoid using simple citation count as the primary certification mechanism.

A promising first experimental criterion is generativity:

An artifact is influential when independently attributable research activity emerges because that artifact existed.

Candidate certifications:

Bronze
Silver
Gold
Platinum
Diamond

These certifications indicate observable influence, not truth or endorsement.

Exit Criterion

At least one transparent, recomputable chart or certification experiment has been run on real Coulomb artifacts.

---

First 90-Day Bootstrap

Phase A — Make It Real

M0   repository structure
M1   CR-000 v0.1
M2   claim/evidence representation
M3   register CR-001

Deliverable

Two living internal research papers.

Phase B — Make It Critical

M4   common lifecycle
M5   paper registry
M6   Scout + Critic agents
M7   first internal circulation

Deliverable

Two papers with structured criticism and revision histories.

Phase C — Make It Interoperable

M8   CR-000 preprint candidate
M9   CR-001 follows
M10  venue discovery

Deliverable

The first Coulomb artifact crosses from Coulomb-native research into conventional science.

This is the point at which Coulomb Research can reasonably be considered an operational research facility rather than only a design concept.

---

Identifier Convention

Research Programs

RP-000

Initial program:

RP-000 — Researching Research

Papers

CR-000    Coulomb Research Paper Zero
CR-001    Soul-Frame Paper One
CR-002    next registered paper

Paper-Local Objects

CR-000-C001    proposition / claim
CR-000-E001    evidence
CR-000-A001    action
CR-000-X001    criticism
CR-000-R001    resource allocation, if required

These identifiers are bootstrap conventions and may later map to cryptographic or globally unique identifiers.

---

Bootstrap Principle

Every substantial Coulomb subsystem should initially arise because a real research artifact demands it.

CR-000 needs literature
→ Scout

CR-000 needs criticism
→ Critic

CR-000 needs explicit propositions
→ proposition representation

CR-000 needs supporting observations
→ evidence representation

CR-000 needs publication
→ Publication Interface

CR-000 needs traceability
→ provenance tracking

CR-000 becomes public
→ Research Signals

CR-000 receives attention
→ Research Charts

This provides the central implementation guardrail:

No Coulomb subsystem should be built until a real research artifact demonstrates the need for it.

---

Role of Paper Zero and Paper One

CR-000 — Self-Experiment

Paper Zero studies and exercises Coulomb Research itself.

It asks whether a minimal, cybernetic, AI-native research architecture can support useful co-creation science.

CR-001 — Transfer Experiment

Paper One tests whether mechanisms developed through the self-experiment transfer into an independent research domain.

Together they establish the first empirical test of the Coulomb Research hypothesis:

design research machinery
        ↓
use it on itself
        ↓
observe and improve
        ↓
apply it elsewhere
        ↓
observe transfer
        ↓
improve again

The milestone plan should evolve based on evidence generated through this loop.